newly compiled kernel > 100MB

[S. Donig]

Most curious. Looks as if I solved the problem by importing an elder
kernel-config.
Nonetheless a great thanks to you all.
I highly appreciated your help.

Simon

On Di, 2005-06-28 at 08:10 +0200, S. Donig wrote:
> On Mo, 2005-06-27 at 15:54 -0700, Bob Nielsen wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 11:00:22PM +0200, S. Donig wrote:
> > > <Snip> 
> > > 
> > > Are there any indirect dependencies for building a kernel, is e.g. a
> > > libc6-upgrade required for Kernels larger 2.6.10 [the last version I
> > > could built normally]? 
> > 
> > 
> > I don't think so (I used 2.3.5-1ubuntu7 from breezy).
> Me too. So that shouldn't be the cause...
> > 
> > Specifying "binary" as a target for make-kpkg gives you 4 .deb packages 
> > (kernel-image, kernel-source, kernel-headers and kernel-doc). Maybe that 
> > explains the 100 MB.
> No, the 100MB Kernel exists besides the source and other packages.
> Actually I really could leave that away. I just wanted to go for sure.
> Thanks for your help.
> > 
> > If you just want to compile and package the image (you already have the 
> > source installed, plus docs and headers are included in source), run 
> > 'make-kpkg --append-to-version foo kernel_image'.
> 
>