Compressed 2.2 kernel about 35% larger than compressed 2.0.x?

Compressed 2.2 kernel about 35% larger than compressed 2.0.x?

Post by Gopal Harikum » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00



Hi,

I downloaded, complied and installed v 2.2 yesterday. The compilation
went without a hitch and the kernel booted up correctly. Everything is
working perfectly. But I notice that the kernel size has increased by
a considerable amount compared to 2.0.x, compiled with exactly the
same features.

Size of /vmlinuz for 2.0.33 on my system: ~325 kB.

Size of /vmlinuz for 2.2.0 with same features: ~450 kB.

Is this normal? Thanks for any help.

Hari.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


-------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Compressed 2.2 kernel about 35% larger than compressed 2.0.x?

Post by Frank Hal » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00



> Hi,

> I downloaded, complied and installed v 2.2 yesterday. The compilation
> went without a hitch and the kernel booted up correctly. Everything is
> working perfectly. But I notice that the kernel size has increased by
> a considerable amount compared to 2.0.x, compiled with exactly the
> same features.

> Size of /vmlinuz for 2.0.33 on my system: ~325 kB.

> Size of /vmlinuz for 2.2.0 with same features: ~450 kB.

> Is this normal? Thanks for any help.

> Hari.

What do you expect? There was 2 years worth of work to get us to 2.2.0
and it would seem to me, that there is alot more code in the 2.2.0
kernel than in the 2.0.x ones.

--
From:      Frank Hale

ICQ:       7205161                      
Website:   http://www.franksstuff.com/  

"Microsoft - How many times do you want to reboot today?"

 
 
 

Compressed 2.2 kernel about 35% larger than compressed 2.0.x?

Post by Gopal Harikum » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00


-> What do you expect? There was 2 years worth of work to get us to 2.2.0
-> and it would seem to me, that there is alot more code in the 2.2.0
-> kernel than in the 2.0.x ones.
->

Hi,

But I have not enabled any of the new kernel options. That is, my
2.2.0 kernel is supposed to have only those features that I had
enabled in my 2.0.x kernel. Is it still the case that the compiled
/vmlinuz would be larger? Oh well, not that
I care since it does not affect the speed or anything as far as I can
tell. Just curious.

Anyway, thanks.

Hari.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


-------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Compressed 2.2 kernel about 35% larger than compressed 2.0.x?

Post by Dan Nguye » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00


: Size of /vmlinuz for 2.0.33 on my system: ~325 kB.

: Size of /vmlinuz for 2.2.0 with same features: ~450 kB.

Did you configure the kernels exactly the same way?

--
           Dan Nguyen            | There is only one happiness in

http://www.cse.msu.edu/~nguyend7 |                   -George Sand

 
 
 

Compressed 2.2 kernel about 35% larger than compressed 2.0.x?

Post by jxfau.. » Sat, 30 Jan 1999 04:00:00



> But I have not enabled any of the new kernel options. That is, my
> 2.2.0 kernel is supposed to have only those features that I had
> enabled in my 2.0.x kernel. Is it still the case that the compiled

Yes, but basic kernel features such as memory management, scheduling
and networking have been changed significantly in 2.2
 
 
 

1. COMPRESS (how much does it compress?)

I was wondering if someone could tell me what the average compression
factor is for the compress command?  We are compressing some of the
filesystems in our nightly backups which makes it difficult to compute
how much data is actually being written to tape.  If I knew the average
compression factor then I could make better estimates.

The Sun man page says 50-60% for English text or source-code.  What
about for an entire filesystem?  What about for an oracle database?
What about other things like say binaries?

Does anyone know?

--
--
Alan W. McKay           | (902)542-2201.158     | Wolfville, N.S. Canada

2. Brainbench Certifications on your resume?

3. Compressed filesystem or Compressed loop?

4. Compatibility issues

5. compressing on the fly: father process seems to end before popened compress

6. Software Programmer Survey--Please help!

7. To compress or not to compress, that is the question.

8. vmware

9. Kernel 2.0.35 and 2.2.0Pre4 with modules on same machine

10. Linux 2.2.x ppp / BSD-compress broken?

11. saving memory with ramdisk -> compressed filesystem with 2.2?

12. for 2.2.x i386 Linux kernel DoS - Affects 2.2.x and probably 2.0.x

13. Can you use the NTFS module from 2.2 kernel to 2.0 kernel?