Re: cleaning up kernel source

[Shaya Potter]

What I usually delete is all the alpha/spark/m68k etc stuff that is never 
going to b used on my 486 system.  This should cut down a little on the 
size.  However, if you run a patch  on the kerenl, some parts might say 
that some files are missing, you should just tell patch to skip those 
files, you don't need them they are for the alpha/sparc/m68k etc ports of 
linux.

Hope this helps,
Shaya
--
Shaya Potter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, David Morris wrote:

> OK, I downloaded the source for the 2.0.24 kernel and compiled a custom 
> kernel 
> yesterday. And now I have the tree leftover taking up 30M on my hard drive. 
> And I was wondering what I can clean up to free up the space.
> 
> I know I can run a make clean to remove the *.o files and other compiling 
> files, but that would still leave quite a bit leftover.
> 
> I am tempted to rm -r the whole tree (which I have done previously), but I 
> see 
> the Documentation that I might want to keep some things handy (like the 
> documentation). So what do I do with all the include files? should I copy 
> them 
> all over to the /usr/include directory? and do I want to leave something 
> hanging around /usr/src/linux?
> 
> Thanks in advance for your assistance. 
> 
> --
> The AtticKeeper: David Morris  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---
> Though no one can go back and make a brand new start,
> anyone can start from now and make a brand new ending... -- Unknown
> ---
> The Nerdnosh Attic: http://www.netins.net/showcase/nerdnosh
> The Lectionary Page: http://www.netins.net/showcase/dmorris/
> PGP Public Key available via Finger
> ---
> 
> 
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 

--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: cleaning up kernel source

[ugs]

On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, Lars Wirzenius wrote:

> "David Morris":
> > do I want to leave something hanging around /usr/src/linux?
> 
> Except possibly the documentation, no. Debian distributes the header
> files as part of the libc5 package.


So that's what's been going on.  What I've been doing is following the
instructions in /usr/src/linux/README and creating pointers in
/usr/include to the kernel source tree (right now for 2.0.24).

Which way is better?


Thanks
Paul Serice

--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: cleaning up kernel source

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,
>>"David" == David Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

David> OK, I downloaded the source for the 2.0.24 kernel and compiled
David> a custom kernel yesterday. And now I have the tree leftover
David> taking up 30M on my hard drive.  And I was wondering what I can
David> clean up to free up the space.

David> I know I can run a make clean to remove the *.o files and other
David> compiling files, but that would still leave quite a bit
David> leftover.

(make-kpkg clean)

David> I am tempted to rm -r the whole tree (which I have done
David> previously), but I see the Documentation that I might want to
David> keep some things handy (like the documentation). So what do I
David> do with all the include files? should I copy them all over to
David> the /usr/include directory? and do I want to leave something
David> hanging around /usr/src/linux?

Well, you really need not bother with the include files, since
 libc5-dev should contain header files for most of your needs.
 However, if you wish to be very cautious, build a
 kernel-headers-2.0.24 package, which will give you all the heades
 (under /usr/src/linux), just in case.

Then rm -r all other subdirectories except the ones you want
 to keep (like the documentation). BTW, after cleaning up, the source
 come to just under 6M.


David> Thanks in advance for your assistance.

You're welcome.

manoj


 Canned explanation about kernel header files
 


The headers were included in libc5-dev after a rash of very
 buggy alpha kernel releases (1.3.7* or something like that) that
 proceeded to break compilations, etc.  Kernel versions are changed
 far more rapidly than libc is, and there are higer chances that
 people install a custom kernel than they install custom libc.

Add to that the fact that few programs really need the more
 volatile elements of the header files (that is, things that really
 change from kernel version to kernel version), [before you reject
 this, consider: programs compiled on one kernel version usually work
 on other kernels].

So, it makes sense that a set of headers be provided from a
 known good kernel version, and that is sufficient for compiling most
 programs, (it also makes the compile time environments for programs
 on debian machines a well known one, easing the process of dealing
 with problem reports), the few programs that really depend on cutting
 edge kernel data structures may just use -I/usr/src/linux/include
 (provided that kernel-headers or kernel-source exists on the system).

Most programs, even if they include , do
 not really depend on the version of the kernel, as long as the kernel
 versions are not too far off, they will work. And the headers
 provided in libc5-dev are just that. 

libc5-deb is uploaded frequently enough that it never lags too
 far behind the latest released kernel.

There are two different capabilities which are the issue, and
 the kernel-packages and libc5-dev address different ones:

 a) The kernel packages try tp provide a stable, well behaved kernel
and modules, and may be upgraded whenever there are significant
advances in those directions (bug fixes, more/better module
support, etc).  These, however, may not have include files that
are non-broken as far as non-kernel programs are concerned, and
the quality of the development/compilation environment is not the
kernel packages priority (Also, please note that the kernel
packages are tied together, so kernel-source, headers, and image
are produced in sync)

 b) Quality of the development/compilation environment is the priority
of libc5-dev package, and it tries to ensure that the headers it
provides would be stable and not break non-kernel programs. This
assertion may fail for alpha kernels, which may otherwise be
perfectly stable, hence the need for a different set of known-good
kernel include files.


-- 
 Caesar had his Brutus--Charles the First, his Cromwell--and George
 the Third ("Treason!" cried the Speaker)--may profit by their
 example.  If this be treason, make the most of it.  -- Patrick Henry
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: cleaning up kernel source

[Lars Wirzenius]

[ Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list. ]

"David Morris":
> do I want to leave something hanging around /usr/src/linux?

Except possibly the documentation, no. Debian distributes the header
files as part of the libc5 package.

-- 
Please read  before mailing me.
Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list.




pgpznueMXRXOi.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: cleaning up kernel source

[Juan Cespedes]

On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, David Morris wrote:

> OK, I downloaded the source for the 2.0.24 kernel and compiled a custom 
> kernel 
> yesterday. And now I have the tree leftover taking up 30M on my hard drive. 
> And I was wondering what I can clean up to free up the space.
> 
> I am tempted to rm -r the whole tree (which I have done previously), but I 
> see 
> the Documentation that I might want to keep some things handy (like the 
> documentation). So what do I do with all the include files? should I copy 
> them 
> all over to the /usr/include directory? and do I want to leave something 
> hanging around /usr/src/linux?

You can delete all the drivers you don't use (drivers/scsi,
for example, is a good choice if you have only IDE),
arch/{alpha,m68k,mips,ppc,sparc}... this way you will be able to
recompile again, just in case.

> --
> The AtticKeeper: David Morris  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---

Juan Cespedes


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

cleaning up kernel source

[David Morris]

OK, I downloaded the source for the 2.0.24 kernel and compiled a custom kernel 
yesterday. And now I have the tree leftover taking up 30M on my hard drive. 
And I was wondering what I can clean up to free up the space.

I know I can run a make clean to remove the *.o files and other compiling 
files, but that would still leave quite a bit leftover.

I am tempted to rm -r the whole tree (which I have done previously), but I see 
the Documentation that I might want to keep some things handy (like the 
documentation). So what do I do with all the include files? should I copy them 
all over to the /usr/include directory? and do I want to leave something 
hanging around /usr/src/linux?

Thanks in advance for your assistance. 

--
The AtticKeeper: David Morris  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Though no one can go back and make a brand new start,
anyone can start from now and make a brand new ending... -- Unknown
---
The Nerdnosh Attic: http://www.netins.net/showcase/nerdnosh
The Lectionary Page: http://www.netins.net/showcase/dmorris/
PGP Public Key available via Finger
---


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]