Re: LILO falsely reports big kernel?

From: H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
Date: Mon Feb 21 2000 - 18:47:15 EST

Next message: Paul Jakma: "Re: Capabilities"
Previous message: Richard B. Johnson: "Re: Linux/ix86 booting process and BIOS"
In reply to: Nate Riffe: "LILO falsely reports big kernel?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10002201356570.3262-100000@maverick.riffe.us.eu.org>
By author: Nate Riffe <inkblot@geocities.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
>
> L-K,
>
> Just now LILO has reported that my freshly compiled kernel was too big
> (472855 bytes) which is smaller than some of the other kernels installed
> here (617431 bytes, for example). Oddly enough, when I recompiled using
> bzImage instead of zImage, I got a kernel 1 byte bigger that LILO
> accepted. Is there some logical explanation for this behavior?
>

Yes. The "b" in "bzImage" stands for "big".

-hpa

-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Paul Jakma: "Re: Capabilities"
Previous message: Richard B. Johnson: "Re: Linux/ix86 booting process and BIOS"
In reply to: Nate Riffe: "LILO falsely reports big kernel?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 23 2000 - 21:00:29 EST