Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> ... Shrinking the kernel would be the only reason I would
> have of touching the kernel as I'm not into trying out
> experimental features. It would be too bad if config doesn't
> do this...
Nick Holland wrote:
> config strictly deactivates the drivers, it doesn't reduce memory
> consumption or disk footprint.
> ...
Digressing slightly into config and what's in the FAQ regarding why or
why not to deviate from GENERIC...
Using config to modify the GENERIC kernel's settings can apparently
improve boot speed. So maybe config should be mentioned in section 5.6
of the FAQ, "Why do I need a custom kernel?" to steer those wondering
about improving boot time away from trying unnecessarily to create a
custom kernel.
e.g. for B' 5.6, "Why do I need a custom kernel?"
Removing device drivers may speed the boot process on
your system, but can complicate recovery should you have
a hardware problem, and is very often done wrong. config
can be used instead of re-compiling to modify kernel parameters
and speed booting. See the section of the config(8) man page
on "kernel modification"
> Since OpenBSD uses a monolithic kernel, it is outside the ability of
> config to physically remove the deactivated drivers. ...
That could also be useful to have in the FAQ somewhere. It's explicit
in the kernel's nature, but could be mentioned for those who miss the
ramifications of using a monolithic kernel.
> Removing drivers for reduced memory is really a "for advanced users
> only" task, and you VERY QUICKLY run into diminishing returns.
That can be emphasized more heavily by moving forward one sentence in
section 5.6, and adding that in.
e.g. for the very start of B' 5.6:
"Actually, you probably don't. Only the most advanced and
knowledgeable users with the most demanding applications
need to worry about a customized kernel or system, and even
then you very quickly run into diminishing returns."
Regards,
-Lars
