[CLUE-Tech] RE: monolithinc Kernel

[Eric Batalden]

--- Matt Gushee <mgushee at havenrock.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 09:48:12AM -0800, Eric
> Batalden wrote:
> > >Hmm, sounds fishy.  I thought vmlinux was the
> name
> > for an >uncompressed
> > >kernel, and vmlinuz was the compressed one.  If
> it
> > were >for some reason
> > >not compressed, maybe that is why it is so big? 
> But
> > make >bzImage is the
> > >right target for a compressed kernel.  So the one
> it
> > is >making in
> > >arch/i386/boot is called vmlinux?  Wierd.
> > 
> > this is how i remember things also.  i do like the
> "it
> > isn't compuressed" theory.  i have checked an
> found
> > the binary for bzip2 in /usr/local/, so i have a
> > program to compress it.  does any one know how to
> make
> > sure this is the one "make bzImage" calls?
> 
> If I'm not mistaken (i.e., I've definitely read this
> somewhere,
> but I don't recall all the details), bzImage stands
> for "big
> zImage," not for "bzip-compressed image." I'm not
> sure how it's
> compressed.
> 
> Are you sure you need a bzImage at all? If your
> kernel is small
> enough (sorry, I forget the size threshold, but I'm
> pretty sure
> it's somewhere over 500k), you may be able to do the
> traditional
> 'make zImage' instead. In fact, I've had the
> experience that
> if the kernel was small enough to build with 'make
> zImage', as
> mine have always been, 'make bzImage' with the same
> configuration
> would produce a broken kernel. I'm not sure why -- I
> didn't look
> into it further, just said 'hmm ...' and built the
> zImage.


checked into bzImage vs. zImage, they both yield the
same sized kernel.

E

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/