On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 09:12:23AM -0500, Todd Vierling wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> 
> : > : Since these options are quite simply not useful to whole classes of users,
> : > : and they *do* bloat the kernel, and that *does* hurt performance, we should
> : > : not blindly include them in all of our example configurations; particularly
> : > : not those for small machines!
> : >
> : > They're in GENERIC for a reason:  those are "generic" configurations meant
> : > to run with nearly all optional components enabled.  The same argument could
> :
> : Did I say "in GENERIC"?  No, I didn't.  I said "all of our example
> : configurations", which is pretty much the case.  Why take issue with
> : something I didn't actually say?
> 
> GENERIC *is* our example configuration.  There's a couple extras on some
> ports, like FOURMEG et al, and those intended for small memory machines

"A couple"?  i386 has *24*.

Some of these are GENERIC_XYZ configurations, and some are INSTALL_XYZ, 
but there are a lot more than "a couple" of others.  And if they're not
"examples", why are they in our distribution?

Thor