From dom at latter.org Fri Feb 12 20:15:02 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... Message-ID: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> I thought I'd see if I could get Ubuntu 9.04 to run on top of 2.6.32, (vaguely hoping to fix various video issues). I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a typical Ubuntu one: 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. From ejlilley at gmail.com Sat Feb 13 20:19:02 2010 From: ejlilley at gmail.com (Edward Lilley) Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:19:02 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: dom at latter.org writes: > I thought I'd see if I could get Ubuntu 9.04 to run on top of 2.6.32, > (vaguely hoping to fix various video issues). > > I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further > investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the > kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But > surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a > typical Ubuntu one: > 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom > 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic > > Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel > would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. > _______________________________________________ > CLUG mailing list > clug at cambridge-lug.org > Website: http://www.cambridge-lug.org I had a problem with networking upgrading to 2.6.32 on Debian recently, with an on-board Realtek 8168 ethernet device. The problem was that the newer kernel added support for more recent Realtek chips, including ones which required non-free firmware, so the whole module was in some way disabled, even though it worked fine for the previously-free-software-only devices. Not sure how relevant this is though! On another note, there seem to be lots of modules built into the kernel these days; I'm not entirely sure how to pass options to them though -- presumably not with file in /etc/modprobe.d/? Maybe modules aren't all that big after all? I would have thought they are mostly wrappers to allow userspace libraries access to various bits of hardware. -- Edward Lilley http://blog.ugnus.uk.eu.org -- http://www.ugnus.uk.eu.org/~edward/ From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 03:16:08 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 03:16:08 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: <4B775CE8.6050406@latter.org> Edward Lilley wrote: > Maybe modules aren't all that big after all? I would have thought they > are mostly wrappers to allow userspace libraries access to various bits > of hardware. For my current Ubuntu 9.04 situation I get: du --si --summarize /lib/modules/2.6.28-18-generic/kernel/ 88M /lib/modules/2.6.28-18-generic/kernel/ My custom kernel has: du --si --summarize /lib/modules/2.6.32.7/kernel/ 537k /lib/modules/2.6.32.7/kernel/ From nix at esperi.org.uk Sun Feb 14 10:33:49 2010 From: nix at esperi.org.uk (Nix) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:33:49 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> On 12 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org told this: > I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further > investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the > kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But > surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a > typical Ubuntu one: > 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom > 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic > > Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel > would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. That depends how much you built in :) if you only built in the hardware you own, the kernel isn't going to be that enormous: nobody owns all the hardware that gets built into an Ubuntu kernel (and not all of it is modular). My vmlinuzes here vary from -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1401168 2010-02-09 21:50 vmlinuz (a kernel for a Soekris embedded system, though not with EMBEDDED defined: no virtual consoles though), all the way up to -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4688000 2010-02-11 20:58 vmlinuz (the kernel for my 64-bit desktop, with Radeon KMS, RAID and initramfs with fsck, busybox, lvm, mdadm, et al). The closest thing to a 'normal' kernel I've got is the one for my server: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3969568 2010-02-09 21:57 vmlinuz (with LVM, Areca RAID (so a 'normal-sized' disk driver only), and no KMS: but even that has a ~500Kb initramfs in it). Compare to the Ubuntu monster, 3941696 bytes plus an 8Mb initrd... From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 11:02:04 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:02:04 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> Message-ID: <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> Nix wrote: [kernel size] > That depends how much you built in :) if you only built in the hardware > you own, the kernel isn't going to be that enormous: nobody owns all the As I said, the config (i.e. the default config that ships with a kernel as downloaded from: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.32.7/) seems to be set to build and include "everything" (i.e. lots of fairly typical hardware) into the kernel itself. But then the size of it seems to suggest that it hasn't. > hardware that gets built into an Ubuntu kernel (and not all of it is > modular). My vmlinuzes here vary from Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down to 1.4MB. IIRC for a long time the aim was to keep the kernel small enough to fit on a floppy. From nix at esperi.org.uk Sun Feb 14 20:30:35 2010 From: nix at esperi.org.uk (Nix) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:30:35 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:02:04 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> Message-ID: <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> On 14 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org stated: > Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down > to 1.4MB. I didn't expect it to end up that small. I'm not sure how it did... > IIRC for a long time the aim was to keep the kernel small > enough to fit on a floppy. That code (the floppy bootloader and so on) was dropped in 2.4, IIRC. From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 22:08:28 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:08:28 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> Message-ID: <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> Nix wrote: > On 14 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org stated: >> Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down >> to 1.4MB. > > I didn't expect it to end up that small. I'm not sure how it did... Turn everything off? I've tried again with a newer kernel and it's now this size: 3126496 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 as I tried to pull more stuff into modules. Ignore any previous comments about the difference between a bzImage and a vmlinuz one - they are the same. From dom at latter.org Mon Feb 15 21:48:33 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:48:33 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> Message-ID: <4B79B321.6080504@latter.org> dom at latter.org wrote: > I've tried again with a newer kernel and it's now this size: > 3126496 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 > > as I tried to pull more stuff into modules. Ignore any previous comments And in case anybody's interested, I've now got a working 2.6.32 underneath Ubuntu 9.04. And if anyone's interested, some /boot filesizes in kilobytes: 99 config-2.6.28-18-generic 114 config-2.6.32-02063208-generic 67 config-2.6.32.8 7592 initrd.img-2.6.28-18-generic 8370 initrd.img-2.6.32-02063208-generic 3558 initrd-2.6.32.8.img 3508 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic 4018 vmlinuz-2.6.32-02063208-generic 3273 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 Those three are the current Ubuntu 9.04 standard kernel, the Ubuntu 2.6.32.8 as provided in a .deb, and the one I just built. From paul+clug at mansfield.co.uk Sat Feb 20 14:55:00 2010 From: paul+clug at mansfield.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:55:00 +0000 Subject: FS: server/workstation memory plus cheap-as-beer laptop memory Message-ID: <4B7FE9B4.7040000@mansfield.co.uk> I thought I'd offer this to CLUG before paying feebay charges, as without P&P and fees I can offer a substantial discount. -1- I've a bunch of server/workstation memory for grabs, Kingston 2GB sticks in DDR2-667 with ECC REG, a mix of single and double-rank DIMMS. It's not the normal consumer grade stuff. ?15 for single, ?25 for dual-rank. Some motherboards can only be filled completely by using single rank (something I discovered the hard way and ended up with lots of unused dual-rank dimms :-( I've memtested it thoroughly and with Kingston giving a lifetime warranty it's a pretty safe bet to buy it second hand. There's still some to be memtested, but when I'll have Xeon L5320 processors for sale too if anyone's interested - I'd sell the servers but the PSUs are flakey and the motherboards have been problematic making them beyond economic repair. That'll leave some 1U chassis free to a good home. -2- I've also got a pair of 512M DDR2 memory in SO-DIMM form for laptops too, not tested but I'll give them a personal non-DOA guarantee. Yours for a beer and a half :-) Paul From dom at latter.org Fri Feb 12 20:15:02 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... Message-ID: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> I thought I'd see if I could get Ubuntu 9.04 to run on top of 2.6.32, (vaguely hoping to fix various video issues). I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a typical Ubuntu one: 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. From ejlilley at gmail.com Sat Feb 13 20:19:02 2010 From: ejlilley at gmail.com (Edward Lilley) Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:19:02 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: dom at latter.org writes: > I thought I'd see if I could get Ubuntu 9.04 to run on top of 2.6.32, > (vaguely hoping to fix various video issues). > > I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further > investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the > kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But > surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a > typical Ubuntu one: > 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom > 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic > > Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel > would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. > _______________________________________________ > CLUG mailing list > clug at cambridge-lug.org > Website: http://www.cambridge-lug.org I had a problem with networking upgrading to 2.6.32 on Debian recently, with an on-board Realtek 8168 ethernet device. The problem was that the newer kernel added support for more recent Realtek chips, including ones which required non-free firmware, so the whole module was in some way disabled, even though it worked fine for the previously-free-software-only devices. Not sure how relevant this is though! On another note, there seem to be lots of modules built into the kernel these days; I'm not entirely sure how to pass options to them though -- presumably not with file in /etc/modprobe.d/? Maybe modules aren't all that big after all? I would have thought they are mostly wrappers to allow userspace libraries access to various bits of hardware. -- Edward Lilley http://blog.ugnus.uk.eu.org -- http://www.ugnus.uk.eu.org/~edward/ From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 03:16:08 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 03:16:08 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: <4B775CE8.6050406@latter.org> Edward Lilley wrote: > Maybe modules aren't all that big after all? I would have thought they > are mostly wrappers to allow userspace libraries access to various bits > of hardware. For my current Ubuntu 9.04 situation I get: du --si --summarize /lib/modules/2.6.28-18-generic/kernel/ 88M /lib/modules/2.6.28-18-generic/kernel/ My custom kernel has: du --si --summarize /lib/modules/2.6.32.7/kernel/ 537k /lib/modules/2.6.32.7/kernel/ From nix at esperi.org.uk Sun Feb 14 10:33:49 2010 From: nix at esperi.org.uk (Nix) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:33:49 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> On 12 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org told this: > I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further > investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the > kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But > surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a > typical Ubuntu one: > 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom > 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic > > Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel > would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. That depends how much you built in :) if you only built in the hardware you own, the kernel isn't going to be that enormous: nobody owns all the hardware that gets built into an Ubuntu kernel (and not all of it is modular). My vmlinuzes here vary from -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1401168 2010-02-09 21:50 vmlinuz (a kernel for a Soekris embedded system, though not with EMBEDDED defined: no virtual consoles though), all the way up to -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4688000 2010-02-11 20:58 vmlinuz (the kernel for my 64-bit desktop, with Radeon KMS, RAID and initramfs with fsck, busybox, lvm, mdadm, et al). The closest thing to a 'normal' kernel I've got is the one for my server: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3969568 2010-02-09 21:57 vmlinuz (with LVM, Areca RAID (so a 'normal-sized' disk driver only), and no KMS: but even that has a ~500Kb initramfs in it). Compare to the Ubuntu monster, 3941696 bytes plus an 8Mb initrd... From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 11:02:04 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:02:04 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> Message-ID: <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> Nix wrote: [kernel size] > That depends how much you built in :) if you only built in the hardware > you own, the kernel isn't going to be that enormous: nobody owns all the As I said, the config (i.e. the default config that ships with a kernel as downloaded from: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.32.7/) seems to be set to build and include "everything" (i.e. lots of fairly typical hardware) into the kernel itself. But then the size of it seems to suggest that it hasn't. > hardware that gets built into an Ubuntu kernel (and not all of it is > modular). My vmlinuzes here vary from Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down to 1.4MB. IIRC for a long time the aim was to keep the kernel small enough to fit on a floppy. From nix at esperi.org.uk Sun Feb 14 20:30:35 2010 From: nix at esperi.org.uk (Nix) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:30:35 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:02:04 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> Message-ID: <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> On 14 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org stated: > Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down > to 1.4MB. I didn't expect it to end up that small. I'm not sure how it did... > IIRC for a long time the aim was to keep the kernel small > enough to fit on a floppy. That code (the floppy bootloader and so on) was dropped in 2.4, IIRC. From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 22:08:28 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:08:28 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> Message-ID: <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> Nix wrote: > On 14 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org stated: >> Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down >> to 1.4MB. > > I didn't expect it to end up that small. I'm not sure how it did... Turn everything off? I've tried again with a newer kernel and it's now this size: 3126496 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 as I tried to pull more stuff into modules. Ignore any previous comments about the difference between a bzImage and a vmlinuz one - they are the same. From dom at latter.org Mon Feb 15 21:48:33 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:48:33 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> Message-ID: <4B79B321.6080504@latter.org> dom at latter.org wrote: > I've tried again with a newer kernel and it's now this size: > 3126496 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 > > as I tried to pull more stuff into modules. Ignore any previous comments And in case anybody's interested, I've now got a working 2.6.32 underneath Ubuntu 9.04. And if anyone's interested, some /boot filesizes in kilobytes: 99 config-2.6.28-18-generic 114 config-2.6.32-02063208-generic 67 config-2.6.32.8 7592 initrd.img-2.6.28-18-generic 8370 initrd.img-2.6.32-02063208-generic 3558 initrd-2.6.32.8.img 3508 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic 4018 vmlinuz-2.6.32-02063208-generic 3273 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 Those three are the current Ubuntu 9.04 standard kernel, the Ubuntu 2.6.32.8 as provided in a .deb, and the one I just built. From paul+clug at mansfield.co.uk Sat Feb 20 14:55:00 2010 From: paul+clug at mansfield.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:55:00 +0000 Subject: FS: server/workstation memory plus cheap-as-beer laptop memory Message-ID: <4B7FE9B4.7040000@mansfield.co.uk> I thought I'd offer this to CLUG before paying feebay charges, as without P&P and fees I can offer a substantial discount. -1- I've a bunch of server/workstation memory for grabs, Kingston 2GB sticks in DDR2-667 with ECC REG, a mix of single and double-rank DIMMS. It's not the normal consumer grade stuff. ?15 for single, ?25 for dual-rank. Some motherboards can only be filled completely by using single rank (something I discovered the hard way and ended up with lots of unused dual-rank dimms :-( I've memtested it thoroughly and with Kingston giving a lifetime warranty it's a pretty safe bet to buy it second hand. There's still some to be memtested, but when I'll have Xeon L5320 processors for sale too if anyone's interested - I'd sell the servers but the PSUs are flakey and the motherboards have been problematic making them beyond economic repair. That'll leave some 1U chassis free to a good home. -2- I've also got a pair of 512M DDR2 memory in SO-DIMM form for laptops too, not tested but I'll give them a personal non-DOA guarantee. Yours for a beer and a half :-) Paul From dom at latter.org Fri Feb 12 20:15:02 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... Message-ID: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> I thought I'd see if I could get Ubuntu 9.04 to run on top of 2.6.32, (vaguely hoping to fix various video issues). I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a typical Ubuntu one: 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. From ejlilley at gmail.com Sat Feb 13 20:19:02 2010 From: ejlilley at gmail.com (Edward Lilley) Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:19:02 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: dom at latter.org writes: > I thought I'd see if I could get Ubuntu 9.04 to run on top of 2.6.32, > (vaguely hoping to fix various video issues). > > I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further > investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the > kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But > surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a > typical Ubuntu one: > 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom > 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic > > Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel > would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. > _______________________________________________ > CLUG mailing list > clug at cambridge-lug.org > Website: http://www.cambridge-lug.org I had a problem with networking upgrading to 2.6.32 on Debian recently, with an on-board Realtek 8168 ethernet device. The problem was that the newer kernel added support for more recent Realtek chips, including ones which required non-free firmware, so the whole module was in some way disabled, even though it worked fine for the previously-free-software-only devices. Not sure how relevant this is though! On another note, there seem to be lots of modules built into the kernel these days; I'm not entirely sure how to pass options to them though -- presumably not with file in /etc/modprobe.d/? Maybe modules aren't all that big after all? I would have thought they are mostly wrappers to allow userspace libraries access to various bits of hardware. -- Edward Lilley http://blog.ugnus.uk.eu.org -- http://www.ugnus.uk.eu.org/~edward/ From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 03:16:08 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 03:16:08 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: <4B775CE8.6050406@latter.org> Edward Lilley wrote: > Maybe modules aren't all that big after all? I would have thought they > are mostly wrappers to allow userspace libraries access to various bits > of hardware. For my current Ubuntu 9.04 situation I get: du --si --summarize /lib/modules/2.6.28-18-generic/kernel/ 88M /lib/modules/2.6.28-18-generic/kernel/ My custom kernel has: du --si --summarize /lib/modules/2.6.32.7/kernel/ 537k /lib/modules/2.6.32.7/kernel/ From nix at esperi.org.uk Sun Feb 14 10:33:49 2010 From: nix at esperi.org.uk (Nix) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:33:49 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:15:02 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> Message-ID: <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> On 12 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org told this: > I've compiled and booted it, but networking doesn't work. Further > investigation reveals that there's only about seven modules, and the > kernel config is set to build everything into the kernel. But > surprisingly the custom kernel isn't *that* much bigger than a > typical Ubuntu one: > 3968128 2010-02-08 17:14 bzImage-2.6.32.custom > 3491824 2010-01-28 04:29 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic > > Is that because it's bzip not gzip? I'd have thought the kernel > would be a lot bigger with all the modules compiled in. That depends how much you built in :) if you only built in the hardware you own, the kernel isn't going to be that enormous: nobody owns all the hardware that gets built into an Ubuntu kernel (and not all of it is modular). My vmlinuzes here vary from -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1401168 2010-02-09 21:50 vmlinuz (a kernel for a Soekris embedded system, though not with EMBEDDED defined: no virtual consoles though), all the way up to -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4688000 2010-02-11 20:58 vmlinuz (the kernel for my 64-bit desktop, with Radeon KMS, RAID and initramfs with fsck, busybox, lvm, mdadm, et al). The closest thing to a 'normal' kernel I've got is the one for my server: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3969568 2010-02-09 21:57 vmlinuz (with LVM, Areca RAID (so a 'normal-sized' disk driver only), and no KMS: but even that has a ~500Kb initramfs in it). Compare to the Ubuntu monster, 3941696 bytes plus an 8Mb initrd... From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 11:02:04 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:02:04 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> Message-ID: <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> Nix wrote: [kernel size] > That depends how much you built in :) if you only built in the hardware > you own, the kernel isn't going to be that enormous: nobody owns all the As I said, the config (i.e. the default config that ships with a kernel as downloaded from: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.32.7/) seems to be set to build and include "everything" (i.e. lots of fairly typical hardware) into the kernel itself. But then the size of it seems to suggest that it hasn't. > hardware that gets built into an Ubuntu kernel (and not all of it is > modular). My vmlinuzes here vary from Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down to 1.4MB. IIRC for a long time the aim was to keep the kernel small enough to fit on a floppy. From nix at esperi.org.uk Sun Feb 14 20:30:35 2010 From: nix at esperi.org.uk (Nix) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:30:35 +0000 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> (dom@latter.org's message of "Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:02:04 +0100") References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> Message-ID: <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> On 14 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org stated: > Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down > to 1.4MB. I didn't expect it to end up that small. I'm not sure how it did... > IIRC for a long time the aim was to keep the kernel small > enough to fit on a floppy. That code (the floppy bootloader and so on) was dropped in 2.4, IIRC. From dom at latter.org Sun Feb 14 22:08:28 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:08:28 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> Message-ID: <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> Nix wrote: > On 14 Feb 2010, dom at latter.org stated: >> Some useful data, thanks. Interesting that you can still squeeze it down >> to 1.4MB. > > I didn't expect it to end up that small. I'm not sure how it did... Turn everything off? I've tried again with a newer kernel and it's now this size: 3126496 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 as I tried to pull more stuff into modules. Ignore any previous comments about the difference between a bzImage and a vmlinuz one - they are the same. From dom at latter.org Mon Feb 15 21:48:33 2010 From: dom at latter.org (dom at latter.org) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:48:33 +0100 Subject: Using upstream kernels... In-Reply-To: <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> References: <4B75A8B6.1010106@latter.org> <87aavcnoua.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B77CA1C.6060002@latter.org> <87635zobs4.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4B78664C.50708@latter.org> Message-ID: <4B79B321.6080504@latter.org> dom at latter.org wrote: > I've tried again with a newer kernel and it's now this size: > 3126496 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 > > as I tried to pull more stuff into modules. Ignore any previous comments And in case anybody's interested, I've now got a working 2.6.32 underneath Ubuntu 9.04. And if anyone's interested, some /boot filesizes in kilobytes: 99 config-2.6.28-18-generic 114 config-2.6.32-02063208-generic 67 config-2.6.32.8 7592 initrd.img-2.6.28-18-generic 8370 initrd.img-2.6.32-02063208-generic 3558 initrd-2.6.32.8.img 3508 vmlinuz-2.6.28-18-generic 4018 vmlinuz-2.6.32-02063208-generic 3273 vmlinuz-2.6.32.8 Those three are the current Ubuntu 9.04 standard kernel, the Ubuntu 2.6.32.8 as provided in a .deb, and the one I just built. From paul+clug at mansfield.co.uk Sat Feb 20 14:55:00 2010 From: paul+clug at mansfield.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:55:00 +0000 Subject: FS: server/workstation memory plus cheap-as-beer laptop memory Message-ID: <4B7FE9B4.7040000@mansfield.co.uk> I thought I'd offer this to CLUG before paying feebay charges, as without P&P and fees I can offer a substantial discount. -1- I've a bunch of server/workstation memory for grabs, Kingston 2GB sticks in DDR2-667 with ECC REG, a mix of single and double-rank DIMMS. It's not the normal consumer grade stuff. ?15 for single, ?25 for dual-rank. Some motherboards can only be filled completely by using single rank (something I discovered the hard way and ended up with lots of unused dual-rank dimms :-( I've memtested it thoroughly and with Kingston giving a lifetime warranty it's a pretty safe bet to buy it second hand. There's still some to be memtested, but when I'll have Xeon L5320 processors for sale too if anyone's interested - I'd sell the servers but the PSUs are flakey and the motherboards have been problematic making them beyond economic repair. That'll leave some 1U chassis free to a good home. -2- I've also got a pair of 512M DDR2 memory in SO-DIMM form for laptops too, not tested but I'll give them a personal non-DOA guarantee. Yours for a beer and a half :-) Paul