30 Jun
2018
30 Jun
'18
7:31 p.m.
On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 1:11 PM, Andy Kosela <akosela(a)andykosela.com> wrote:
On Saturday, June 30, 2018, Warner Losh <imp(a)bsdimp.com> wrote:
It's possible to build FreeBSD much smaller as well (some ARM ports can get
that small)... But that's not the comparison I was going for since that
often understates the effect of the SCSI/SATA stack you need these days, or
the network stack, or other technology that's considered 'standard.'
It's
entirely due to ease of use and cheap memory.
I didn't include a growth of the Linux kernel due to the less-prevalent use
of GENERIC-type kernels there, and a lack of good data sources I could mine
quickly for apples-to-apples comparisons over time.
Warner
Greetings,
I'd like to thank everybody that sent me data for my unix kernel size
stuff. There's two artifacts I've crated. One I think I've shared before,
which is my spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13C77pmJFw4ZBmGJuNarB
UvWBxBKWXG-jtvARxJDHiXs/edit?usp=sharing
It would be interesting to compare it to Linux throughout the history. I
can still compile a minimal latest Linux kernel that is around 2M. Not bad
if you ask me.