Re: [PATCH 0/8] base-small: CONFIG_BASE_SMALL for small systems

2005-01-31 Thread Matt Mackall
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 09:55:32PM -0300, Horst von Brand wrote: > Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > This patch series introduced a new pair of CONFIG_EMBEDDED options call > > CONFIG_BASE_FULL/CONFIG_BASE_SMALL. Disabling CONFIG_BASE_FULL sets > > the boolean CONFIG_BASE_SMALL to 1 and it

Re: [PATCH 0/8] base-small: CONFIG_BASE_SMALL for small systems

2005-01-31 Thread Horst von Brand
Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > This patch series introduced a new pair of CONFIG_EMBEDDED options call > CONFIG_BASE_FULL/CONFIG_BASE_SMALL. Disabling CONFIG_BASE_FULL sets > the boolean CONFIG_BASE_SMALL to 1 and it is used to shrink a number > of core data structures. The space savings

[PATCH 0/8] base-small: CONFIG_BASE_SMALL for small systems

2005-01-30 Thread Matt Mackall
This patch series introduced a new pair of CONFIG_EMBEDDED options call CONFIG_BASE_FULL/CONFIG_BASE_SMALL. Disabling CONFIG_BASE_FULL sets the boolean CONFIG_BASE_SMALL to 1 and it is used to shrink a number of core data structures. The space savings for the current batch is around 14k. - To unsub