From: Matt Heler <lkml@lpbproductions.com>
To: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Minimizing the Kernel
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:39:01 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9
References: <3F71C712.9070503@coyotegulch.com>
In-Reply-To: <3F71C712.9070503@coyotegulch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200309240939.02316.lkml@lpbproductions.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1303
Lines: 27

Well for starters dont use gcc 3 or above.. code size has increased 
dramatically with thoose versions. sure they give you more optimization , but 
if your looking for a small kernel use anything below 3..

Matt H.

On Wednesday 24 September 2003 09:32 am, Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
> I want to created the smallest, fastest kernel that supports all the
> necessary features of a given system.
>
> Obviously, the answer is very system dependent, requiring a keen
> knowledge of the relationships between hardware and Linux components.
>
> Unless I'm missing something (always a possibility), the kernel
> configurations do not provide a clear idea of component size. In other
> words, if I include "burfulgunk port support" in my kernel build, I'd
> like to have a rough idea of the component's size. I might not need to
> support the "burfulgunk", especially if it's a large component (for,
> say, a legacy port.)
>
> I'm well aware that code sizes differ between platforms; I'm looking for
> general information, as a guideline to generating a small kernel.
-
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/