* Re: udev source size
2004-01-19 8:47 udev source size Tomas
@ 2004-01-19 13:40 ` Martin Hicks
2004-01-19 19:51 ` Greg KH
2004-01-19 20:52 ` Martin Hicks
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Martin Hicks @ 2004-01-19 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-hotplug
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 536 bytes --]
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:47:02AM +0100, Tomas wrote:
> Binary size of udev is 50 KB, but source size is >2MB.
> Is this necessary?
It's due to the udev tarball including a whole whack of external stuff.
I believe that Greg is doing this because many of these programs and
libraries are very young, so compatibility changes from version to
version.
The tarball is currently carrying around libsysfs and klibc. The bulk
of the extra space is klibc.
mh
--
Martin Hicks || mort@bork.org || PGP/GnuPG: 0x4C7F2BEE
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: udev source size
2004-01-19 8:47 udev source size Tomas
2004-01-19 13:40 ` Martin Hicks
@ 2004-01-19 19:51 ` Greg KH
2004-01-19 20:52 ` Martin Hicks
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2004-01-19 19:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-hotplug
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:40:44AM -0500, Martin Hicks wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:47:02AM +0100, Tomas wrote:
> > Binary size of udev is 50 KB, but source size is >2MB.
> > Is this necessary?
>
> It's due to the udev tarball including a whole whack of external stuff.
> I believe that Greg is doing this because many of these programs and
> libraries are very young, so compatibility changes from version to
> version.
>
> The tarball is currently carrying around libsysfs and klibc. The bulk
> of the extra space is klibc.
We also have a copy of a sysfs tree in order to run tests.
But the bulk of the tarball is probably the bitkeeper data. The tarball
contains all of the bitkeeper metadata so that anyone can see the entire
revision history.
Is it really a big deal that the tarball is the current size?
thanks,
greg k-h
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net
Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: udev source size
2004-01-19 8:47 udev source size Tomas
2004-01-19 13:40 ` Martin Hicks
2004-01-19 19:51 ` Greg KH
@ 2004-01-19 20:52 ` Martin Hicks
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Martin Hicks @ 2004-01-19 20:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-hotplug
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 11:51:16AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:40:44AM -0500, Martin Hicks wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:47:02AM +0100, Tomas wrote:
> > > Binary size of udev is 50 KB, but source size is >2MB.
> > > Is this necessary?
> >
> > It's due to the udev tarball including a whole whack of external stuff.
> > I believe that Greg is doing this because many of these programs and
> > libraries are very young, so compatibility changes from version to
> > version.
> >
> > The tarball is currently carrying around libsysfs and klibc. The bulk
> > of the extra space is klibc.
>
> We also have a copy of a sysfs tree in order to run tests.
>
> But the bulk of the tarball is probably the bitkeeper data. The tarball
> contains all of the bitkeeper metadata so that anyone can see the entire
> revision history.
>
Yeah, you're right about that. The tree size goes from 8972 down to
4504 if I do:
find . -type d -name BitKeeper -o -name SCCS | xargs rm -rf
> Is it really a big deal that the tarball is the current size?
not to me...
mh
--
Martin Hicks || mort@bork.org || PGP/GnuPG: 0x4C7F2BEE
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net
Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread