From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 3 01:02:53 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B84016B307; Sun, 3 Jul 2005 01:02:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ps@mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B65644BC3; Sun, 3 Jul 2005 00:52:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ps@mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 053EF5DA79; Sat, 2 Jul 2005 17:07:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: ps@mu.org Delivered-To: ps@mu.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [216.136.204.119]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 858A45C9C2 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:27:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hub.freebsd.org (hub.freebsd.org [216.136.204.18]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E87F565CE; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:27:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org) Received: from hub.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D39116A4D5; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:27:32 +0000 (GMT) Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE7D16A4CF; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:27:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2372343D48; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:27:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior-wifi.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KGRrMv050355; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:27:54 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <41769194.4060809@freebsd.org> From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040929 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jamie rishaw at google mail References: <41767CF1.2020005@FreeBSD.org> <6ff30abd04102008163115a32d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6ff30abd04102008163115a32d@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.86.1.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Errors-To: owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on elvis.mu.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: Cc: current@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Fwd: What do people think about not installing a stripped /kernel ?] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 01:02:55 -0000 X-Original-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:25:56 -0600 X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 01:02:55 -0000 jamie rishaw at google mail wrote: > What are the performance implications of a debug kernel? > > Disk space really shouldnt even be an issue.. if it is, and its down > to the difference of 20 megs, well, duno. 512 meg CF's going for > sub-$50 .. the only reason i could see even a debate would be any > significant performance hits.. Disk space on the release CD images is at a premium, and putting debug kernels on there generally consumes 10-15MB that could be used by packages. Scott _______________________________________________ freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"