From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 26 12:54:45 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3482F16A400 for ; Sat, 26 May 2007 12:54:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rdivacky@vlk.vlakno.cz) Received: from vlakno.cz (vlk.vlakno.cz [62.168.28.247]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5BFB13C45A for ; Sat, 26 May 2007 12:54:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rdivacky@vlk.vlakno.cz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5138BF328; Sat, 26 May 2007 14:54:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at vlakno.cz Received: from vlakno.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vlk.vlakno.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lv41X-vsdCAw; Sat, 26 May 2007 14:54:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from vlk.vlakno.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24C58BF2E5; Sat, 26 May 2007 14:54:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from rdivacky@localhost) by vlk.vlakno.cz (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l4QCscrl093913; Sat, 26 May 2007 14:54:38 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from rdivacky) Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 14:54:38 +0200 From: Roman Divacky To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20070526125438.GA93705@freebsd.org> References: <20070525095146.GA45288@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: size of kernel after gcc4.2 upgrade X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 12:54:45 -0000 On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 01:55:50PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: > Roman Divacky wrote: > > > ie. after gcc42 import the kernel size increased roughly by 60% thats > > a little too much. is there any forgotten option or something that > > makes the kernel grow so big? > > Ouch, I've just got bitten by this. I'm trying to update a 6.x machine > to 7-current, and couldn't install the kernel because there's no space > for in on the root file system. This is an old-style root file system of > 256 MB. By fiddling around I've managed to free enough space, and I see > now that my new /boot/kernel's size is 106 MB! This means I can't hold > both kernel and kernel.old on the root file system. > > This may need to be addressed in upgrade documents. (And others - for > example, tuning(7) still implicitly recommends a 128 MB root file system). well.. I dont think that 60% increase of size when you are optimizing for size is normal. I even think its a "bug" in that sense that something wrong is set somewhere which causes this. I certainly dont believe this is normal