Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 23:11:04 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Fwd: What do people think about not installing a stripped /kernel ?] Message-ID: <843590857.20041020231104@andric.com> In-Reply-To: <4176C0C8.4060408@freebsd.org> References: <41767CF1.2020005@FreeBSD.org> <20041020.105839.100358845.imp@bsdimp.com> <20041020170907.GA1216@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv> <200410201913.42879.max@love2party.net> <20041020194547.GD2195@ip.net.ua> <4176C0C8.4060408@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
------------208F5A2E30BEE7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2004-10-20 at 21:47:20 Scott Long wrote: > I tend to agree. What do you think of my proposal to have installkernel > (optionally or whatever) put unstriped binaries somewhere outside of the > root partition? Yes, that is a very nice solution, although you also might say that having "two versions" of the same kernel file could be confusing (and/or wasteful). Also, please note that you might want debug versions of all kernel modules in the same place, since those can cause crashes too, alas. May I suggest /var/crash as a possible location? :) Since you'll be looking in there anyway if you need to debug a crash dump. (On the other hand, I've been installing debug kernels for the past year or so, always using make installkernel.debug, and then renaming all /boot/kernel/*.debug files to their basenames, but this is rather cumbersome. However, you always have all debugging info in one place.) ------------208F5A2E30BEE7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) iD8DBQFBdtRosF6jCi4glqMRAn+8AJ9GyND7F1v+lzBbMn8SnvJlWufvzQCfQf1T oKUoMTJ9ENMq040l4PpJt8E= =3n+d -----END PGP MESSAGE----- ------------208F5A2E30BEE7--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?843590857.20041020231104>