Re: Summary: experiences with NanoBSD, successes and nits on a Soekris 4801

From: Daniel Eischen <deischen_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:22:23 -0400 (EDT)
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> In message <20050619155228.Y6413_at_fledge.watson.org>, Robert Watson writes:
>
> >I general, I was quite pleased with the experience.  NanoBSD is fairly
> >straight forward to configre and adapt.
>
> I'm still not satisfied with the nanobsd config/customize process,
> ideally I would want to have only a single file with a sensible
> format control the nanobsd build process.
>
> The major obstacle is the "cutting things down to size" process
> using NO_FOO options.
>
> In order to get down a 31MB partition size things have to be cut
> very extensively and not even the NO_FOO options is enough at that
> level but sniper rm(1) commands are necessary.
>
> I think the NO_FOO options is the best compromize, but we need them
> to be more aligned to user concepts, "I don't need a compiler and
> all that", rather than "Don't build the C++ compiler and hobble
> the build because of this".

How about NO_FOO[_INSTALL], where NO_FOO = no build and no install,
and NO_FOO_INSTALL just prevents the install.  In theory, you could
build the complete system, then use NO_FOO_INSTALL instead of rm(1).

-- 
DE
Received on Sun Jun 19 2005 - 18:22:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:37 UTC