Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz

• Next message: Robert Greimel: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• Previous message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Alan Cox writes:

>> where you overwrite your old kernel image with a new one without
>> rebooting instantly).
>>
>> But is it so much more expensive than a /proc/config.whatever ?
>
> Use that argument 50 times and your kernel has grown 100K.

If I get the same level of benefit 50 times, wonderful!

With /proc/config.gz, there is no need to wonder where the
previous admin stored his config file.

> Unfortunately everyone keeps using the argument and forgetting
> the cumulative effect

The effect is additive, not multiplicative. Considering the
exponential nature of Moore's Law, additive bloat is no bloat
at all.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Robert Greimel: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• Previous message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] 2.2: /proc/config.gz"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:28 EST