From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from www.llwyncelyn.cymru ([82.70.14.225]:50522 "EHLO fuzix.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161817AbdKQXqs (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Nov 2017 18:46:48 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 23:46:20 +0000 From: Alan Cox To: Greg KH Cc: Sebastian Gottschall , Willy Tarreau , Harsh Shandilya , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 3.10.108 (EOL) Message-ID: <20171117234620.064b6498@alans-desktop> In-Reply-To: <20171115085024.GB24542@kroah.com> References: <20171104230639.GA25503@1wt.eu> <20171105074659.GA26639@1wt.eu> <29db159f-7cb3-1a4f-28a2-73830f8afc22@dd-wrt.com> <20171114221844.GA3929@1wt.eu> <20171115043202.GA4315@1wt.eu> <03a3f3bc-eb2a-ab83-1016-a45ed9169648@dd-wrt.com> <20171115085024.GB24542@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > > i just wanted to throw some stones on the bloated kernel problem which is > > increasing > > People used to be working on that, but then it seemed like the "size" > got to a point that people were comfortable with it. Are you sure that There's also a lot of pushback to things that add a ton of ifdefs. > just changing some build options would not make your image smaller? > Letting people know sometime in the past few years that the kernel was > getting "too big" for you would have been good to do :) It's also an increasingly hard problem to deal with because the scale of big machines means the algorithms themselves in a modern Linux OS just don't make sense for a tiddly embedded router. I know lots of people build them that way but if you compare it with one of the more conservative *BSD builds you have to wonder why not use BSD instead - especially with nanoBSD ? (and BSD has the reverse problem - most BSD does not scale to a modern bigger machine of course). Alan "1.2.13 was the last true Linux" ;-)