From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 19 19:36:09 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F26816A41C; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 19:36:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from pasmtp.tele.dk (pasmtp.tele.dk [193.162.159.95]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E846743D1F; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 19:36:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (0x535c0e2a.sgnxx1.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [83.92.14.42]) by pasmtp.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC0051EC31B; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:36:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j5JJa3Jn066960; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:36:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Robert Watson From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:10:00 BST." <20050619155228.Y6413@fledge.watson.org> Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:36:03 +0200 Message-ID: <66959.1119209763@critter.freebsd.dk> Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Summary: experiences with NanoBSD, successes and nits on a Soekris 4801 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 19:36:09 -0000 In message <20050619155228.Y6413@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". I am painfully aware that nanobsd is a case of moving from a "program" to "program product" in the sense of The Mythical Man-Month, and therefore I have no (or at best little) hope that nanobsd will ever get "make world" like ease of use, but we can certainly make it better than it is now. For anyone intested I should point out that there is a webpage, first draft at this point: http://www.freebsd.org/projects/nanobsd and that any and all help is welcome! -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.