--- "Jeremy C. Reed" <reed@reedmedia.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, John Kelly wrote:
> 
> > >> I'm not in favor of using any version beyond 1.6.X, due to
> > >> stability concerns.
> >
> > >What stability concerns?
> >
> > Kernel size doubled, gcc 3.X is a hog that ought to be slaughtered,
> > threads and SMP are in developmental transition.  That's not what I
> > have in mind for a stable server.  Not to mention the bad reports I
> > have read about NetBSD 2.X problems ...
> 
> Your original email mentioned Debian Linux as the alternative.
> 
> GCC 3.3.5 I believe is the default GCC with Debian (but like Debian,
> NetBSD via pkgsrc has alternative versions).
> 
> As for kernel sizes, my Linux kernels on my Linux boxes grew from
> around
> 534380 bytes to 1279069 bytes and even 2220021 bytes -- and using
> many
> modules. 2.2M is close to the 2.3 MB and 2.6 MB kernels I see on some
> NetBSD 2.x boxes.

Also, NetBSD kernels are not compressed by default while Linux kernels
usually are. So that means the real difference could be much larger
(unless you do not use zImages or bzImages and only uncompressed Linux
kernels). I think the boot loader for NetBSD can load gzipped kernels
though...

> [...]
 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com