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). -- DEReceived 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