From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
To: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bloat report 2.6.3 -> 2.6.4
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:32:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040314003220.GG14833@fs.tum.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040313235940.GQ20174@waste.org>
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 05:59:40PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 06:57:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>...
> > > But I think it's fair to say that new features that are on by default
> > > are in fact bloat in some sense.
> >
> > Perhaps in some sense, but not in any interesting sense.
> >
> > For the average computer you can buy at your supermarket today it isn't
> > very interesting whether the kernel is bigger by 1 MB or not.
> >
> > People who need to care about the size of the kernel [1] use hand-tuned
> > .config's that are far away from defconfig - and those people wouldn't
> > enable unneeded features that are on by default.
>
> And my coverage of creep in other _commonly used_ parts of the kernel
> would then be nil. Given that allyesconfig can't be expected to build
> a kernel on any given day, defconfig is the least arbitrary and most
> useful of arbitrary choices.
>
> > You use a metric "size increase of a defconfig kernel [2]", and I simply
> > claim that this metric doesn't measure anything useful for practical
> > purposes.
>
> defconfig is not an unreasonable approximation of features people use.
What exactly is your goal?
As already said:
*** For the average user, the size of the kernel doesn't matter *** [1]
*** People that care about size don't use defconfig ***
> If something is added to defconfig, odds are that people will start
> using it. Not perfect, obviously, but I've yet to see anyone suggest
> anything else that actually provides some coverage.
Did you ever consider that your approach of an "automated scheme" might
be an approach of very limited value?
cu
Adrian
[1] OK, 10 MB more would matter, but we are more in the ranges of
perhaps a few hundreds kB
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-14 0:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-12 20:44 Bloat report 2.6.3 -> 2.6.4 Matt Mackall
2004-03-12 23:22 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-12 23:53 ` Matt Mackall
2004-03-13 17:08 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-03-13 17:33 ` Matt Mackall
2004-03-13 17:57 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-03-13 23:59 ` Matt Mackall
2004-03-14 0:32 ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2004-03-14 0:57 ` Matt Mackall
2004-03-22 22:51 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-03-24 17:22 ` Tim Bird
2004-03-13 22:17 ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-03-14 0:15 ` Matt Mackall
2004-03-14 21:03 ` John Cherry
2004-03-13 23:34 ` Horst von Brand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040314003220.GG14833@fs.tum.de \
--to=bunk@fs.tum.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox