1. is it possible/feasible to extract a kernel source NOT to a unix parition, say not to /sur/src, but to a win32 partition, say /dev/hda5; and then, change into that directroy and then use "make" plus "output" option to send the compiled file to the unix ext3/ext2 partition?

for example:
the disk geometry goes like:
-------
/dev/hda1 win32 fat32 mounted as win-1
/dev/hda2 linux ext3 mounted as /
/dev/had5 win32 fat 32 mounted as win-2
-----
and the commands are (briefly to decribe such intentions):
------
cp kernel*.tar.gz /win-2
cd /win-2
tar xfvz kernel*.tar.gz
cd /win-2/kerne*
make O=/kernel-new menuconfig
make O=/kernel-new moudules_install install
(perassume that /kernel-new exists)
--------

2. after compiling, how to clean UNWANTED/TEMP files? since usually a newly compiled kernel consumes at least 600mb.
would "make clean" do?
---
any suggestions would be appreciated!!

this is plain wrong, how did you get that?

sorry for the inexactness!
maybe i did't express EXACTLY,i meant: uncompressed source+compiled files, since i changed directly into the directory where the source was uncompressed and then ran the make commands,
hehe, which totally amounts to about 850M if "make oldconfig" was issued. now minus 207mb as the size of the uncompressed source,the difference is about 650m.

while, this time, i streamlined the kernel and redundancy-free kernel size is about 428m, corresponding to my pc specs.
since i've read the readme again, and used make O=/dirname
and after compile i deleted the source completely, leaving only the compiled files which is a little less than 428m. just now i changed into the output directory and deleted temp files of the size of about 120m, so the net output size is about 338m!

and the modules created reside in /lib/modules, which tooks about 100m.
hence: totally, kernel 2.6.14.5 compile would take at least/about 438mb.
-----
so, a nice way should be:
1. extract the source to /usr/src
2. make,.., but put the compiled files in another directory---mine is /core
3. after compile, delete the source and change into the diretory of output files, delete the temp files there.
-----
well, i've corrected my ignorance!
as for the "transplant" compile, i have not tired:

Testing results fot the 2nd question:
as for the second one, i'v tried it out correclty!
it's feasible to compile the source at a partition (here mounted as a directory) with ANY file system supported by ext3/ext2 and output the compliled files to an ext3/ext2 partition.
------
with this it's possible for users with dual/multi boots and with win32-preference to use limited amount of space allocated to linux to compile a kernel without fear of "free space panic"!

this is one kernel-source which has been compiled and not cleaned afterwards
this is my whole /usr/src which has 2 kernel sources in it - the one above and one just unpacked and not yet compiled
You probably also have 2 source trees there and not just one...

well...My 64-bit 2.6.15 kernel source takes 340 mbytes and that is source only.

i was confused!
--
this is my whole /usr/src which has 2 kernel sources in it - the one above and one just unpacked and not yet compiled
You probably also have 2 source trees there and not just one...
--
Jomen has a gentoo!
and i've fc 4 /32bit, while Markelo has a 64-bits.
their sizes vary and i have indeed just one kernel in /usr/src


thanks for your concern