Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:34:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:34:40 -0500 Received: from packet.digeo.com ([12.110.80.53]:11690 "EHLO packet.digeo.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:34:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 15:41:05 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Daniel Egger Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Kernel bloat 2.4 vs. 2.5 Message-Id: <20030304154105.7a2db7fa.akpm@digeo.com> In-Reply-To: <1046817738.4754.33.camel@sonja> References: <1046817738.4754.33.camel@sonja> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.9 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Mar 2003 23:44:59.0716 (UTC) FILETIME=[11951040:01C2E2A8] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 977 Lines: 27 Daniel Egger wrote: > > Hija, > > I've seen surprisingly few messages about the dramatic size increase > between a simple 2.4 and a 2.5 kernel image. > > I just decided to check back with the 2.5 series again after my last try > with 2.5.53 (which wouldn't even boot) but had to dramatically cut down > the kernel featurewise to keep it below 1MB because I can't boot it over > tftp otherwise. > > 909824 Feb 14 20:02 vmlinuz-192.168.11.3-2.4.20 > 954880 Mar 4 17:01 vmlinuz-192.168.11.3-2.5.63 2.4 has magical size reduction tricks in it which were not brought into 2.5 because we expect that gcc will do it for us. Please specify the compiler which was used, and use /usr/bin/size to report image sizes. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/