I'm only interested in what is going in the file /mach_kernel. So
are you
saying that I'm not able to build a /mach_kernel file for the Intel
platform using the available xnu sources for 10.4.8 which is
equivalent
to the /mach_kernel file Apple provides as part of 10.4.8?
I thought that they are about the same and therefore there can not
be much difference in the source code files except for comments.
Just fyi, here's an "ls -l" for 10.4.9 on Intel. Despite the size
difference, the kernel from sources seems to work fine on the
hardware we have. (Does the vanilla one have more stuff linked in,
instead of loading kexts? Haven't a clue.)
rick
ps: I suspect mach_kernel.orig was actually an older 10.4 that 10.4.9,
looking at the date on it.
Your comparison is flawed. You are comparing a single arch kernel
(mach_kernel) with a bi-arch kernel (mach_kernel.org).
Run:
file /mach_kernel
file /mach_kernel.orig
And you will see what I mean...
A proper comparison would extract the single arch portion matching
your architecture from the fat, original kernel and then you can
compare the two sizes...
And that show the same as "file /mach_kernel". And now you can
compare the sizes properly...
Best regards,
Anton
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer, http://www.linux-ntfs.org/
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-kernel mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/email@hidden
