At 07:38 AM 5/6/00 +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
>On Thursday, 4 May 2000 at 17:00:35 -0500, Jeffrey J. Mountin wrote:
> > At 11:40 AM 5/4/00 +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
> >> There's a separate issue about whether to build kernels with debug
> >> symbols by default. That takes a lot more space (30 MB as compared to
> >> about 8). But if you have a debug kernel, I don't see any reason to
> >> install a stripped version.
> >
> > Running the non-stripped kernel uses more memory
>
>No, this isn't correct, not with ELF.
>
> > and isn't there also a performance issue.
>
>No.
Thanks for clarifying that, but were either memory or performance an issue
back in the AOUT days? I seem to recall something to that point, but might
be wrong.
> > Also what is gained by running it,
>
>Disk space.
Then it's an issue of disk layout. I use a 100 MB root, which should be
good for number of years to come and /var is not a part of the root
partition. IMO space is (or should be) a non-issue or at least should be
for most. YMMV and don't care to beat that horse some once more.
> > as long as you have the complimentary debug kernel in /var/crash (or
> > wherever) for the stripped boot kernel.
>
>It's the one that savecore saves, and there's more opportunity for
>using the wrong debug kernel for dump analysis.
True, but then one would hope someone doing analysis would know
better. Maybe there should be an "make install debug" that would either
install the debug version instead of the stripped version *or* install it
in /var/crash.
If there are no memory or performance issues with the debug kernel, then I
wouldn't mind it being installed as the default. Then those that wish to
strip it may do so. As always the point is who gains changing the current
method.
Jeff Mountin - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems/Network Administrator
FreeBSD - the power to serve
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
