> On Friday 2008-12-26 21:23, Roland wrote:
>
>> what about some "make modules_install_compressed" instead ?
>>
>> as i have run out of diskspace quite often when installing test kernels,
>> i
>> think we really need a feature like this.
>>
>> i`d also favour the makefile approach.
>> why another kconfig option?
>>
>> jan`s patch looks clean and simple, but i think it`s a little bit
>> intrusive...
>
> Why so? module-ini
with "intrusive" i meant, that all modules are now compressed by default and
there is no switch to build them uncompressed.
so you change a long established default which may not be welcomed by
everyone and give no option for conservative people.
we should take care and not break things.
default uncompressed, compressed implented as an option is a better
strategy, imho.
discuss changing the default at a later time then.
roland
>>
>> regards
>> roland
>>
>> ps:
>> i`d use gzip without "-9" as this gives very little space savings. it
>> mostly
>> burns cpu and slows things down too much.
>> ( see
>> http://www.linuxjournal.com/files/linuxjournal.com/linuxjournal/articles/080/8051/8051f1.png
>
> Here is one that is tailored for kernel modules:
> http://tinyurl.com/8f2xta
> Looks pretty much like the one from LJ but of course, .ko files
> compress better than LJ :)
> Oh well.
Roland wrote:
>> On Friday 2008-12-26 21:23, Roland wrote:
>>
>>> what about some "make modules_install_compressed" instead ?
>>>
>>> as i have run out of diskspace quite often when installing test
>>> kernels, i
>>> think we really need a feature like this.
>>>
>>> i`d also favour the makefile approach.
>>> why another kconfig option?
>>>
>>> jan`s patch looks clean and simple, but i think it`s a little bit
>>> intrusive...
>>
>> Why so? module-ini
>
> with "intrusive" i meant, that all modules are now compressed by default
> and there is no switch to build them uncompressed.
> so you change a long established default which may not be welcomed by
> everyone and give no option for conservative people.
>
How many people use the option to install an uncompressed kernel?
> we should take care and not break things.
> default uncompressed, compressed implented as an option is a better
> strategy, imho.
> discuss changing the default at a later time then.
>
--
Bill Davidsen <[email protected]>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
