From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Apr 6 7: 0:10 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from ns.clientlogic.com (ns.clientlogic.com [207.51.66.75]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D910151AA; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:00:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ChrisMic@clientlogic.com) Received: by site0s1 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <2J8LTR9H>; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:58:51 -0400 Message-ID: <6C37EE640B78D2118D2F00A0C90FCB441A5FF9@site2s1> From: Christopher Michaels To: 'Greg Lehey' , Greg Black Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG, FreeBSD Hackers Subject: RE: Debug kernel by default (was: System size with -g) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:59:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Maybe I'm a little out of the loop, but as a general user I feel I should voice my opinions (questions). I understand the up-sides of a debug kernel (although I wouldn't mind some clarification), but what are the down sides? - The kernel is larger, correct? Is this just file size or does it take up significantly more memory as well? - Does a debug kernel impart any performance hit? Any other down sides? Consider this from the stand-point of an average user. -Chris > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Lehey [SMTP:grog@lemis.com] > Sent: Monday, April 05, 1999 6:58 PM > To: Greg Black > Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG; FreeBSD Hackers > Subject: Re: Debug kernel by default (was: System size with -g) > > On Monday, 5 April 1999 at 11:25:44 +1000, Greg Black wrote: > > Greg Lehey writes: > > > >> Interestingly enough, we are currently discussing this in -hackers. > >> We're thinking about changing the way the kernel is built so that a > >> debug kernel will be the default. > > > > I think this is a terrible idea, except possibly for -current. > > I run a lot of FreeBSD machines, all of them -release (though > > some might move to -stable if needed). They never crash and I > > expect they never will, so debug kernels are just a waste of > > resources as far as I'm concerned. I'm sure this applies to > > lots of people who run production machines. > > That's the whole problem. Then you get a mystery crash which is never > repeated, and because you don't have a debug kernel you can't analyse > it. > > > At the very least, the decision to build a debug kernel should > > be up to the installer > > Yes, we never disputed this. > > > and should default to non-debug. > > So far, you're the only person to voice this opinion. > > > After all, those people who might do anything with a debug kernel > > can easily read the instructions on building/installing such a thing > > and those people who just want to use FreeBSD won't be burdened with > > the extra compilation time, disk space, memory waste during normal > > operation, etc., associated with a debug kernel. > > I don't think you've read my proposition properly. You certainly > haven't replied to the points I raised. > > Greg > -- > See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers > finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message