From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun 19 20:27:51 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 214F616A41C;
	Sun, 19 Jun 2005 20:27:51 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [204.156.12.53])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA31843D48;
	Sun, 19 Jun 2005 20:27:50 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50])
	by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 359AF46B06;
	Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:27:50 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:30:30 +0100 (BST)
From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org
To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0506191610170.7472-100000@sea.ntplx.net>
Message-ID: <20050619212919.Y6413@fledge.watson.org>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0506191610170.7472-100000@sea.ntplx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, 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
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 20:27:51 -0000


On Sun, 19 Jun 2005, Daniel Eischen wrote:

>> 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).

I'd very much like to see this, but would like to see the Mk 
infrastructure provide a sensible way to do it.  Offhand, I don't know 
what that sensible way should be.

Regardless, NanoBSD is a good example of a situation where you want to 
build something -- i.e., the full compiler suite, but not install it, and 
devd is a particularly motivating case now that dhclient won't run 
properly without it.

Robert N M Watson