Re: Kernel too big?

Stefan Monnier (monnier+lists/linux/kernel/news/@TEQUILA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU)
23 Sep 1997 23:03:51 -0400

Thomas Wouters <> writes:
> On Tue, 23 Sep 1997 wrote:
> > need one (ok, some people two or more). If you download a tree, unpack it
> > and remove, say, the net/ subsystem, the kernel won't compile.

I could indeed consider this as a misfeature or at least a bug which
isn't crying to be fixed as long as the ditribution is monolithic.

> to locate, identify and download... I think splitting the kernel up is not a
> bad idea, but it _needs_ to stay simple. Yesterday I looked at egcs, which

In order to be simple, the only solution that I can see is to make it
transparent. More specifically, one could "simply" have a "mini-kernel"
distribution where only the core functionality is to be found and then
you'd do:

> gmake xconfig
> gmake fetch
> gmake zImage

The fetch could be done via ftp or Lynx and the "distribution site" could be
determined in any number of ways. Of course, a monolithic distribution
would probably still be needed for those poor users that don't have FTP access.

This would allow very fine grain splitting and even allow not to put drivers
explicitely in the kernel distrib, but to just tell ftp where the latest
version can be found.