From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Aug 2 13:53:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D731D37BF25 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:53:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from semuta.feral.com (semuta [192.67.166.70]) by feral.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA31686; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:52:46 -0700 Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:51:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Marius Bendiksen Cc: Neil Blakey-Milner , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Conditionally removing cosmetic messages for small kernels (PICOBSD). In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Is there a known define that can be used by kernel module writers so they know when they're on PicoBSD? On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Marius Bendiksen wrote: > > If I were to do/start the work on the rest of the system, would this be > > acceptable? Initial patch attached. (There seems to be "quirk" fixes > > mixed in with the cosmetic stuff, so the patches aren't as clean as they > > could be.) > > This sounds like a great idea to me. I've been pondering hacking up > patches for BUILD_TINY/BUILD_SMALL options throughout various system > utilities, but I just haven't had the time to look at it yet. > > Being able to tune various parts of the build process better (memory > footprint vs speed etc..) would allow us to tailor PicoBSD to more uses > than we're currently able to. > > Marius > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message