Andrew Gillham wrote:
> IMO, it depends on the impact of the changes.  If it is just an increase
> in the size of the kernel, go for it.  After all GENERIC is a pig anyway.
> If it is going to slow down a GENERIC kernel, I would recommend against it.
> While it is not recommended to run GENERIC for performance reasons, it is
> often done, and the extra size is not really an issue on modern(*) x86
> hardware.

The addition of MCA stuff into GENERIC would not impact run-time performance
at all. It's just like any other device driver - if you don't have
the device, you don't need to care about it.

> Having said all of that, I would tend to think a lot of PS/2 machines would
> barely boot with a stock GENERIC.  So even with PS/2 support in GENERIC, it
> seems like a PS2_SMALL kernel might be appropriate as well.

Yeah, this is precisely the reason why I think it would be more
appropriate to have separate kern set for IBM PS/2. Most IBM PS/2 machines
have 4MB memory (some have less) and won't boot 4MB kernel. It MAY
be put to GENERIC_TINY, but that would mean unnecessary additional bloat
for typical, non-PS/2 machines.

Jaromir
-- 
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>      http://www.ics.muni.cz/~dolecek/
NetBSD - just plain best OS! -=*=- Got spare MCA cards or docs? Hand me them!