Re: Has the size of stable /modules increased a lot lately?
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 02:28:27PM -0800, Bruce A. Mah wrote: If memory serves me right, Warner Losh wrote: : I could put it in the release notes if you feel that's a more appropriate : place? I think it might be. It certainly wouldn't hurt there. If I were to vote, I'd put it in the release notes. -crl -- Chad R. Larson (CRL15) 602-953-1392 Brother, can you paradigm? [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] DCF, Inc. - 14623 North 49th Place, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254-2207 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: Has the size of stable /modules increased a lot lately?
At 9:31 PM -0700 11/19/01, Chad R. Larson wrote: On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 07:49:49PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: The comments for the commit include which adds the ability to compile modules -g as well (among other things). The original commit to current (1.241 on Aug 2nd) was a bit more explicit as to the effect: When building a debugging kernel with modules, build modules with debugging support as well. It isn't just that the ability is now available, it's that anyone who has debugging set for the /kernel *will* also get it for /modules. Personally, I think it makes sense that if the kernel is built with debugging, the modules should as well. All we need is a heads up in the release notes (my preference) or in the updating instructions. I do agree that the change is a sensible one, now that I know what caused the increased size of /modules. But that increase did greatly disrupt my 'make installkernel', right in the middle of an otherwise uneventful update to the latest stable. It would have been nice to know what was going to happen before I was sitting there with a screen full of disk full errors and a half-installed kernel... I suspect it's worth a short blurb in UPDATING, just to say people with 'makeoptions DEBUG=-g' in their kernel are going to see a 15-meg increase in the size of their /modules directory with the first build they do after Oct 18th, and another 15-meg (for /modules.old) with the second build after that date. If you run out of space in '/', you may need to comment out the DEBUG option. [On the other hand, this change was over a month ago, and it apparently hasn't bitten many folks, so the note probably doesn't need to be all that detailed] The release notes would have a different kind of entry, one saying that the change was made, and why this change was a good idea. [okay, I'll shutup about it now] -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: Has the size of stable /modules increased a lot lately?
If memory serves me right, Garance A Drosihn wrote: The file which changed was: src/sys/conf/Makefile.i386 For the RELENG_4 branch, the significant commit was: 1.179.2.6 done on Thu Oct 18th. [snip] Awesome...great explanation. Might be a couple days until my next release notes editing session, but I'll write something up based on what you gave me. Thanks much! Bruce. msg37514/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Has the size of stable /modules increased a lot lately?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bruce A. Mah writes: : --==_Exmh_834049033P : Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii : : If memory serves me right, Garance A Drosihn wrote: : : The file which changed was: : src/sys/conf/Makefile.i386 : : For the RELENG_4 branch, the significant commit was: : 1.179.2.6 done on Thu Oct 18th. : : [snip] : : Awesome...great explanation. Might be a couple days until my next : release notes editing session, but I'll write something up based on what : you gave me. Ah, this is a change in behavior in -stable. I think that deserves an UPDATING entry. I hadn't got that before now. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: Has the size of stable /modules increased a lot lately?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bruce A . Mah writes: : --==_Exmh_834049033P : Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii : : If memory serves me right, Garance A Drosihn wrote: : : The file which changed was: : src/sys/conf/Makefile.i386 : : For the RELENG_4 branch, the significant commit was: : 1.179.2.6 done on Thu Oct 18th. : : [snip] : : Awesome...great explanation. Might be a couple days until my next : release notes editing session, but I'll write something up based on what : you gave me. Ah, this is a change in behavior in -stable. I think that deserves an UPDATING entry. I hadn't got that before now. Warner # To compile just the kernel with special optimizations, you should use # this instead of CFLAGS (which is not applicable to kernel builds anyway). # There is very little to gain by using higher optimization levels, and doing # so can cause problems. It is worse still. CFLAGS from /etc/make.conf also bites. You would think with the above comment from /etc/default/make.conf that CFLAGS should not affect the building of modules which are part of the kernel. Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message -- Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Has the size of stable /modules increased a lot lately?
This is something odd I noticed when I did a buildworld. It may be due to something I did, but I thought I'd mention it in case other people start noticing the same thing. My system is working fine, so this is not a crisis for me. Just an oddity that I thought I'd mention. [and apologies if this has been covered in some recent message, but I don't remember any reference to anything like this] - - - - I went to do a buildworld today, and ran out of space in '/' when it came time for the 'installkernel' step. After removing a number of other files I eventually did get it to install, but '/' is still a bit cramped. It turns out my /modules directory is taking up 20meg, which seems a bit high. But by the time I did get the install to go ok, I had blown away all old copies of /modules, so I can't say for sure what the size used to be. My recent buildworld times were: Oct 13th, Nov 11th (or 12th), Nov 18th Looking at the output from the daily log-runs, there was a definite spike in disk-usage in '/' with the install on the 11th, and another jump today (it's a bit hard to say how much, given how many unrelated files I had to remove to get the installkernel to work). Right now I have 44-meg tied up in /kernel+/kernel.old+/modules+/modules.old, and back at the start of November *everything* in '/' added up to about 43-meg. In comparing my /modules to someone who did a buildworld in early Nov, all of my modules are larger than his. My /etc/make.conf includes: CFLAGS= -O -pipe NOCLEANDEPENDS=true USA_RESIDENT= YES And my kernel config does include 'makeoptions DEBUG=-g'. And I am also running with softupdates on for '/', which makes the 'installkernel' a bit more likely to fail when free space is low. The thing is, all of those have been true for at least six months, so that does not explain why I'd see a sudden spike. The only kernel-config change I've made since Sept is to add device 'urio' (presumably that wouldn't blow up the size of ALL modules). I'll probably take out the DEBUG in my kernel config, or turn off softupdates (and mount a separate /tmp), so I'm not in a bind here. I'm just curious why there would be a sudden jump. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
