Baslinux mailing list

[sindi keesan <keesan AT sdf.lonestar.org>]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, David Moberg wrote:

> On 12/15/05, sindi keesan <keesan AT sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> > See http://keesan.freeshell.org/bl for
> > 2.2.16 kernel bzImage.vam which supports
> > vesafb (vesa 2.0 cards)
> > atyfb (ati mach64)
> > matroxfb (as module only).    - download my matroxfb.o
> >
> > Instructions in /bl/blfiles.htm
....

> > David Moberg helped a lot with this and offered to compile the same thing
> > for 2.4.31 with usb-storage and the rest of his 2.4.31 usb support.  In
> > 2.4 atyfb will be a module, but vesafb has to be built into the kernel.
> >
> > David, will the usb devices all be modules?
>
> Yes, unless you want a bigger kernel. It is already 710K+.

> > This kernel might support booting from memory stick (scsi and usb
> > required) - should usb-storage be compiled into the kernel to avoid the
> > need for initrd?
>
> You will need an initrd anyway, no point in making the kernel even
> bigger.

Do you mean an initrd to boot from memory stick (insmod usb-storage and 
what else?).

> > Take a look at config.vam (vesa-ati-matrox) and let him know if you want
> > anything added.  This config is loosely modelled on BL2 but also has loop
> > built in.  No network file systems or firewall, but they can be added on
> > request.  It is over 500K and therefore bz not z.
> >
> > How much larger would the same kernel be in 2.4, without the USB?

I see why Steven is sticking with 2.2.2.6!!!
Too bad it won't work right with most usb-storage devices.

> About 200K. Since USB is completely modular, it adds a negligible
> amount.

> I have no idea what Linus and company have done to make the
> latest Linux versions so big. 2.6 is gigantic, even with the linux-tiny
> patches which strip out a lot of core functionality. IIRC from the
> last time I tried 2.6, it was 350K for a minimal kernel that did
> absolutely nothing. Adding IDE support alone pushed it above
> 500K.

Is it possible to edit the kernel Makefile to make a smaller kernel?
What do you mean by core functionality?

Is anyone trying to make a smaller equivalent of 2.6 which still has the 
more commonly required functions such as USB?  Why could 2.2.26 not be 
made to handle usb-storage correctly?  Maybe someone will fix it.

I can use two of our usb storage devices from a DOS boot disk with maybe 
20K of extra drivers.

> Slackware 10.2 has a 'testing' 2.6 kernel. The bzImage is 3.1MB.
> That is with heavy compression!! Obviously, the kernel alone will
> take up all of the extended memory on anything older than a
> Pentium.

I can't imagine how large the kernel source code must be by now.
Does anyone offer an i386-only kernel source package?
I deleted all sorts of stuff for other architectures to save disk space.

> The link in the following post might be helpful, if it was not dead. :(
> http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9711.2/0110.html
>
> I will look around for more information on making Linux smaller
> for simplicity and for older hardware.

That could prove very useful for some future BL.

> David
> _______________________________________________
> BasLinux mailing list
> BasLinux AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/baslinux

keesan AT sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org