> Umm... Windows 95, Windows NT, Windows 3.1x, Soloris, SunOS, HP-UX, and any
> other kernel that dosn't come with source. The features that you don't
> need/want and are disabled in your kernel config never eat cycles, memory,
> or disk space. If you don't have source then, at a theoritacal minimum
> (assuming that those features aren't in modules), they will take up disk
> space in your kernel image, and will take memory untill they are freed
> during boot, and will eat cycles to free.
In 95/NT the drivers dont as tightly integrate into the kernel.. So, yes,
features that you dont want take up mem/cpu. But drivers dont eat mem/cpu,
however, drivers do eat disk and it's not clear about what you can/cant
remove)
> In linux, on the other hand, these features take up only two keypresses
> ("n\n").
Well, they takeup disk.. But you can remove them there too.. (I've created
special dial-on-demand/web caches that use about 10megs of HD, and thats
without trying hard)
> "Anybody who thinks that their compiler is smarter than they are
> probably disagrees with me."
> -=- Linus Torvalds
Hehehe.. I like that one too.. It's alread in my fortune.. :)