From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 01:18:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035B816A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 01:18:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.u4eatech.com (blackhole.u4eatech.com [195.188.241.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288CE43D31 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 01:18:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard.williamson@u4eatech.com) Received: (from filter@localhost) by mail.u4eatech.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id i199IRe00619 for freebsd-small@freebsd.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:18:27 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: mail.u4eatech.com: filter set sender to richard.williamson@u4eatech.com using -f Received: from venus.u4eatech.com (unknown [172.30.40.8]) by mail.u4eatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74DF51577D3 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:18:16 +0000 (GMT) Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.1.20040209091113.023ff280@cygnus> X-Sender: richard@cygnus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0 Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 09:12:18 +0000 To: From: "Richard P. Williamson" In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES version=2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) Subject: RE: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 09:18:30 -0000 At 16:41 06/02/2004, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote: >> >m0n0BSD is another good choice from what I have seen. >> >> FreeBSD vs Linux decision made prior to my hire... >> >I dont understand, m0n0BSD, m0n0WALL and PicoBSD are all FreeBSD. Oh, sorry. Thought it was another BSD branch. I'll do a google on it today. TFTI Regards, rip -- Richard Williamson richard.williamson@u4eatech.com U4EA Technologies Ltd +44 (0) 117 373 6760 Bristol, UK BS1 6PL x5030 From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 01:18:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 038CA16A4CF for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 01:18:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.u4eatech.com (blackhole.u4eatech.com [195.188.241.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2812A43D1F for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 01:18:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard.williamson@u4eatech.com) Received: (from filter@localhost) by mail.u4eatech.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id i199IRf00622 for freebsd-small@freebsd.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:18:27 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: mail.u4eatech.com: filter set sender to richard.williamson@u4eatech.com using -f Received: from venus.u4eatech.com (unknown [172.30.40.8]) by mail.u4eatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95CD9157807 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:18:16 +0000 (GMT) Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.1.20040209091223.023fec00@cygnus> X-Sender: richard@cygnus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0 Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 09:16:18 +0000 To: From: "Richard P. Williamson" In-Reply-To: <006c01c3ece3$bbbb9530$0fce75d8@cybertime.net> References: <200402051205.i15C59F05666@cygnus.degree2.com> <022601c3ec3a$9a9218b0$0fce75d8@cybertime.net> <6.0.1.1.1.20040206100236.023dd4a8@cygnus> <006c01c3ece3$bbbb9530$0fce75d8@cybertime.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,NO_EXPERIENCE, REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES version=2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) Subject: Re: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 09:18:30 -0000 At 19:02 06/02/2004, Cybertime Hostmaster wrote: >> >m0n0BSD is another good choice from what I have seen. >> >> FreeBSD vs Linux decision made prior to my hire... > >m0n0BSD is a FreeBSD child, so it fits within that requirement. > >Personally there are many reasons I like FreeBSD over LINUX, some of which >are practical ones. But here is something to keep in mind if you are more >comfortable with LINUX: FreeBSD has LINUX compatibity support. Actually, I'm a VxWorks guy. No experience with either linux or *BSD so this is a by-my-bootstraps level of problem. >A couple other things to think about with m0n0BSD. Like the link provided >by Richard for Pico shows, m0n0 is built on a more modern kernel. His >link references the 4.3 for Pico, and m0n0 presently uses the 4.9. That's actually closer to what I'm using at the moment (4.8R) so it begins to look more and more interesting. >http://neon1.net/misc/minibsd.html I'll check that out today, also. TFTI Regards, Richard -- Richard Williamson richard.williamson@u4eatech.com U4EA Technologies Ltd +44 (0) 117 373 6760 Bristol, UK BS1 6PL x5030 From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 09:25:34 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCCD016A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:25:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from cruzio.com (dsl3-63-249-85-132.cruzio.com [63.249.85.132]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C0843D1D for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:25:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: from mail.cruzio.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i19JO9Z2000245 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:24:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: (from brucem@localhost) by mail.cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i19JO83L000244 for freebsd-small@freebsd.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:24:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:24:08 -0800 (PST) From: "Bruce R. Montague" Message-Id: <200402091924.i19JO83L000244@mail.cruzio.com> To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Subject: RE: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:25:34 -0000 For the archives/record, the following statement in this thread reflects the notion that PicoBSD is a "distribution", in this case the remark indicates that it's thought to be a distribution based on FreeBSD 4.3: "> ... Pico shows ...built on a more modern kernel... > ...the 4.3 for Pico, and m0n0 presently uses the 4.9." No, No, No. PicoBSD is just an alternate means of _building_ any version of FreeBSD. Think of it as a wrapper script around a normal kernel build that also crunches up a bunch of apps into a buffer in a static driver built into the kernel and uses alternative rc scripts that are about the minimal required to run diskless. The biggest drawbacks to PicoBSD are that it does not support loadable modules and requires that your apps can be "crunched" toghether, which due to collision of public symbols may not be the case. PicoBSD is still very nice to have when you want to boot one file and get an entire small FreeBSD system up. It's still easy to make single floppy "rescue" systems. Entire compressed PicoBSD systems, apps and all, are small enough so that they can be mailed as attachments, for instance... As the first sentence in "man picobsd" says: "picobsd is a script which can be used to produce a minimal implementation of FreeBSD (historically called PicoBSD) which typically fits on one floppy disk, or can be downloaded as a single image file ..." - bruce From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 11:01:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79B4B16A4CF for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:01:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7788C43D1D for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:01:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (peter@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i19J1cbv083140 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:01:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: (from peter@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i19J1b7Y083134 for freebsd-small@freebsd.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:01:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:01:37 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200402091901.i19J1b7Y083134@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: peter set sender to owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-small@FreeBSD.org Subject: Current problem reports assigned to you X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 19:01:38 -0000 Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o [2000/01/03] misc/15876 small PicoBSD message of the day problems o [2001/06/18] misc/28255 small picobsd documentation still references ol o [2002/09/13] kern/42728 small many problems in src/usr.sbin/ppp/* afte o [2003/01/12] misc/46998 small [patch] Support PicoBSD source in other l o [2003/05/14] misc/52255 small picobsd build script fails under FreeBSD o [2003/05/14] misc/52256 small picobsd build script does not read in use 6 problems total. From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 11:44:47 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C7716A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:44:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from imgate01.cybertime.net (imgate01.cybertime.net [216.117.206.24]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D3843D1D for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:44:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hostmaster@cybertime.net) Received: from cybertime.net (mail.cybertime.net [216.117.209.200]) 7FE6CD711D for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:52:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from techoffice [216.117.206.15] by cybertime.net (SMTPD32-8.05) id A32E4EA000AC; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:44:46 -0800 Message-ID: <003b01c3ef46$eb809e90$0fce75d8@cybertime.net> From: "Cybertime Hostmaster" To: References: <200402091924.i19JO83L000244@mail.cruzio.com> Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:57:17 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: Re: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 19:44:47 -0000 > For the archives/record, the following statement in this > thread reflects the notion that PicoBSD is a "distribution", > in this case the remark indicates that it's thought to > be a distribution based on FreeBSD 4.3: > > "> ... Pico shows ...built on a more modern kernel... > > ...the 4.3 for Pico, and m0n0 presently uses the 4.9." You clipped out the clarifying parts. I was talking about the link, the FAQ, not Pico itself. The problem with much of the Pico documentation I have looked at so far is it deals with older kernel issues. When the kernel is newer, those issues may no longer exist, or may be addressed in a new manner. The advantage of a project that works with the present kernel is that any issues that are discussed take this into account. This does not make m0n0 specifically better than Pico in any way, shape or form. It just makes it easier for someone stepping in to BSD for the first time to get a grasp of the present issues, settings, etc. For example, a FAQ for an older BSD miniaturizing project might reference using kernel build options to control the number of processes, etc. In contrast, a newer FAQ for a newer kernel would very likely talk about /boot/loader.conf. That is just one example, and perhaps not the best example. The third option I talked about, miniBSD, is a better example. He shows some differences between the 4.x and 5.x kernel that are specific to things commonly done when making a smaller FreeBSD. As for the issues you mentioned with Pico itself, I was not talking about them because I was not talking about Pico. I was only discussing the link, the FAQ. --Eric From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 14:33:21 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 898AB16A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:33:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from cruzio.com (dsl3-63-249-85-132.cruzio.com [63.249.85.132]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C07343D1F for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:33:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: from mail.cruzio.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1A0VHZ2000626 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 16:31:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: (from brucem@localhost) by mail.cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i1A0VDX8000625 for freebsd-small@freebsd.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 16:31:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 16:31:13 -0800 (PST) From: "Bruce R. Montague" Message-Id: <200402100031.i1A0VDX8000625@mail.cruzio.com> To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:33:21 -0000 Hi. Eric, I wanted to make sure that the impression wasn't left that picobsd was a "distribution" forked off of a snapshot of FreeBSD. This seemed to be implied to me by the sentence: > Like the link provided > by Richard for Pico shows, m0n0 is built on a more modern kernel. As you say, this assumption may result from a quick glance at the link, however, this assumption is emphatically not true. The assumption that picobsd is a distribution seems a fairly common assumption when people first encounter it, so I responded to it. It's not right to think of PicoBSD as a project either, which some may infer from this: > The advantage of a project that works with the present kernel is that any > issues that are discussed take this into account. I realize you're probably talking specifically about the m0n0 projects and documentation here, but the first phrase "The advantage of a project that works with the present kernel" without considering the second qualifying phrase "issues that are discussed..." may leave the implication that picobsd doesn't work with the present FreeBSD kernel. Sorry I'm being picky on this, I do see what you mean I think but it may not be clear on a fast reading of the above that picobsd is not a project and that it can work with any FreeBSD kernel. PicoBSD isn't a project, it's just a script available in every FreeBSD source tree. See: /usr/src/release/picobsd/build/picobsd As I posted earlier, I built a PicoBSD system the other night in minutes on a FreeBSD 4.9 stable system, a present kernel. If thinking in terms of "distributions", it's probably most accurate to think of each picobsd build as creating a custom distribution, with the distribution contents defined in the "crunch.conf" file and "mfs_tree" and "floppy.tree" trees. At one time there were 5 or so reference configurations ("distributions") available, and you're right that they mostly don't work as-is now because the size of the base system outgrew what would fit on a floppy, the contents of libraries that must crunch together correctly change, etc.. I agree with the thrust of both your posts; If someone wants to get rapidly into using a FreeBSD diskless system, one of the available "canned" systems or some of the systems using scripts that copy FreeBSD contents to CF or CD are probably the way to go. Using "rc.diskless" and a few of the other tools it is not at all that hard to roll your own in this case. PicoBSD does have a learning curve, a number of sharp edges (everything crunched, no loadable modules), and documentation that ages rapidly. A full FreeBSD system booting diskless from compact flash is almost always more conventient, powerful, and easy to work with than picobsd. On the other hand, if you need a real small embedded system with the FreeBSD TCP/IP stack and FreeBSD system utilities, and are comfortable with FreeBSD kernel builds, you can do some neat stuff with picobsd. My experience, roughly, has been that, with modern versions of FreeBSD, if you have 32M or more on your boot device, use FreeBSD (with 128M or more, always use FreeBSD). If you have 8M or less, use PicoBSD. In between, it depends. There are of course numerous other considerations (Do you want to run XFree86?). If you need to build a quick rescue floppy because you can't boot your hard disk, build a picobsd floppy on another system, etc.. Although I've looked at the m0n0BSD and miniBSD pages a few times, I don't know that much about them. Did m0n0BSD replace the rc scripts with an alternative? miniBSD looks like a good set of notes and manual procedures - good documentation - showing one way to copy and strip-down FreeBSD to compact flash. - bruce From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 17:13:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73FFC16A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:13:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from imgate01.cybertime.net (imgate01.cybertime.net [216.117.206.24]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4091A43D41 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:13:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hostmaster@cybertime.net) Received: from cybertime.net (mail.cybertime.net [216.117.209.200]) 62884D70BA for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:21:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from techoffice [216.117.206.15] by cybertime.net (SMTPD32-8.05) id A01F838B00E8; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:13:03 -0800 Message-ID: <023e01c3ef74$c7ca13e0$0fce75d8@cybertime.net> From: "Cybertime Hostmaster" To: References: <200402100031.i1A0VDX8000625@mail.cruzio.com> Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:25:34 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: Re: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 01:13:05 -0000 > Hi. Eric, I wanted to make sure that the impression wasn't > left that picobsd was a "distribution" forked off of a > snapshot of FreeBSD. This seemed to be implied to me by > the sentence: > > > Like the link provided > > by Richard for Pico shows, m0n0 is built on a more modern kernel. True, it is not forked off. m0n0BSD is more forked off than Pico is because in some of their implementations they have replaced some of the code. Specifically I saw this in the m0n0Wall version, which is designed to turn a single board computer into a router. These changes were not to the Kernel, but to userland. But FreeBSD is really the combination of both, so any change make it non-FreeBSD, or modified-FreeBSD, or whatever. And that is the only reason m0n0's two versions can be called different from FreeBSD, rather than just saying it is a custom compile of FreeBSD. PicoBSD, as you clearly stated, falls into that other category. It is simply a custom compile of FreeBSD. It has been a few months since I looked into all the m0n0 customizations, so digging through their site and documentation will get a much better explanation of what changes they make. > true. The assumption that picobsd is a distribution seems > a fairly common assumption when people first encounter > it, so I responded to it. Distribution has become quite an interesting term in POSIX circles since the spread of LINUX. Used to be that "Software Distribution" was the guy you called when you needed more copies of a particular program. Now it is a whole category of software collections, ie: the Red Hat distribution. FreeBSD itself has no distributions, which is one of the stronger points. m0n0BSD, especially m0n0Wall, could easily be called, a software distribution that is based on FreeBSD. And yes, I agree that the present PicoBSD is not a distribution. I do not know if the original PicoBSD was a "distribution" like deviation, such as m0n0BSD is, or if it was just a modified build to slim it down. I remember reading about it once, and the origin was not important enough for me to remember. I think it was when I was reading about dummynet that I read up a bit on Pico for the first time. > It's not right to think of PicoBSD as a project either, > which some may infer from this: Not according to the documentation for FreeBSD. http://www.freebsd.org/internal/developer.html That, at least, makes the term "project" somewhat more defined. And the other projects they list are all basically custom compiles of FreeBSD. > Sorry I'm being picky on this, I do see what you mean I > think but it may not be clear on a fast reading of the > above that picobsd is not a project and that it can work > with any FreeBSD kernel. You harped a lot on the term project, but it is a project, as defined by the people that write FreeBSD. Yes, the end result of that project is a script. Yes, the goal of that script is a custom compile of FreeBSD. So since the FreeBSD people use it, can we agree to use it and just let it drop at that? > As I posted earlier, I built a PicoBSD system the other > night in minutes on a FreeBSD 4.9 stable system, a present > kernel. Nice. Happy to hear it works. The project page for PicoBSD was last updated in Jan 1999. I have not looked at the PicoBSD script to see that last time it was also updated. So working or not, does the latest PicoBSD script take advantage of changes in the kernel that have been made in the last 49 months? I do not know. What I do know is that if it does, those changes are not even noted on the PicoBSD project page. In fact, that FAQ you linked is a) Not on the PicoBSD project page, and b) Has a HECK of a lot better information on PicoBSD than the Pico BSD project page. It would be nice if they adopted it, linked to it, or whatever. It would be nice if the web page for PicoBSD was more active and current. I hope that 5.x updates to the script, if they are made, get documented properly there. > If thinking in terms of "distributions", it's probably Yes, "distribution" and "FreeBSD" are oil and water terminology wise. > I agree with the thrust of both your posts; If someone > wants to get rapidly into using a FreeBSD diskless system, > one of the available "canned" systems or some of the > systems using scripts that copy FreeBSD contents to CF > or CD are probably the way to go. Using "rc.diskless" and > a few of the other tools it is not at all that hard to roll > your own in this case. PicoBSD does have a learning > curve, a number of sharp edges (everything crunched, no > loadable modules), and documentation that ages rapidly. > A full FreeBSD system booting diskless from compact flash > is almost always more conventient, powerful, and easy to > work with than picobsd. Part of why I pointed to m0n0BSD is because it is both. They have a pre-compiled version for an assortment of hardware. They also have a "hackers" section for how to do your own build from FreeBSD. > want to run XFree86?). If you need to build a quick rescue > floppy because you can't boot your hard disk, build a > picobsd floppy on another system, etc.. Funny side note, wifiBSD, another custom compile from FreeBSD, recently made a bootable CD version. Then one of the maintainers had system issues, and he used his bootable CD as a sort of rescue disk. > Although I've looked at the m0n0BSD and miniBSD pages a > few times, I don't know that much about them. Did m0n0BSD > replace the rc scripts with an alternative? They have made some changes, most in their sub version m0n0Wall. > miniBSD looks > like a good set of notes and manual procedures - good > documentation - showing one way to copy and strip-down > FreeBSD to compact flash. Yes. miniBSD seems to be a way to re-invent the wheel on ones own. But for many custom applications, you are required to do so. Not because your version of the wheel is better, but because your management wants your wheel to be YOURS and not someone else's. So the miniBSD notes can easily be part of the glue between FreeBSD, PicoBSD, and that third choice you mentioned, the big ???, custom builds designed for between 8 and 32 MB of disk space. --Eric From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 19:27:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF2B16A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:27:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from cruzio.com (dsl3-63-249-85-132.cruzio.com [63.249.85.132]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1678D43D1D for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:27:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: from mail.cruzio.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1A5PhZ2001000 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:25:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: (from brucem@localhost) by mail.cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i1A5PhfZ000999 for freebsd-small@freebsd.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:25:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brucem) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:25:43 -0800 (PST) From: "Bruce R. Montague" Message-Id: <200402100525.i1A5PhfZ000999@mail.cruzio.com> To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 03:27:08 -0000 Hi. Eric, you've hit on the crux of some things I think. > So since the FreeBSD people use it, can we agree to use it and just let it > drop at that? Yes, happily, subject to one point regarding terminology! You've probably found one of the reasons picobsd sometime gets considered a distribution separate from FreeBSD. Today "FreeBSD Development Projects" collides somewhat with a common current connotation of "open source project", namely implying an independent project with it's own resources, something like the "XFree86" or the "DragonFly" project. Words like "release", "distribution", and "project" are getting quite a work out. Regarding: > The project page for PicoBSD was last updated in Jan 1999. > ... > ... those changes are not even noted on the PicoBSD project page. > ... > It would be nice if the web page for PicoBSD was more active and current. In some ways it might be valid to consider picobsd a project that succeeded, became stable, and has now become just another element of the system. As you note, what might be considered the "development project" documentation has become dated. My sense (guess?) is that today "man picobsd" is considered the only up-to-date documentation and that the "reference configurations" are being allowed to lie fallow pending developments. Regarding: > does the latest PicoBSD script take advantage of > changes in the kernel that have been made in the last 49 months? I just checked the cvs for the script and doc: picobsd 1.28 3 months simokawa Remove obsolete disklabel and newfs options. picobsd.8 1.24 13 months schweikh english(4) police. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/release/picobsd/build/ http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/share/man/man8/ These don't seem that out of line for something reasonably stable that slowly tracks FreeBSD developments as needed using the same methods as much of the rest of FreeBSD. - bruce From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 10 13:37:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D41F16A4CE; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:37:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from imgate01.cybertime.net (imgate01a.cybertime.net [216.117.206.24]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00A0C43D1D; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:37:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hostmaster@cybertime.net) Received: from cybertime.net (mail.cybertime.net [216.117.209.200]) 75ECED70C1; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:45:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from techoffice [216.117.206.15] by cybertime.net (SMTPD32-8.05) id AF0055EF010E; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:37:04 -0800 Message-ID: <003301c3f01f$c7782ca0$0fce75d8@cybertime.net> From: "Cybertime Hostmaster" To: References: <200402100525.i1A5PhfZ000999@mail.cruzio.com> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:49:37 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: Re: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:37:06 -0000 > just another element of the system. As you note, what > might be considered the "development project" documentation > has become dated. My sense (guess?) is that today > "man picobsd" is considered the only up-to-date documentation > and that the "reference configurations" are being allowed > to lie fallow pending developments. So basically what has happened is that the online documentation has become outdated. And if people are unaware of the man file, because they think it is something completely separate from FreeBSD, then it becomes easy for them to miss the documentation that is more up to date. In the end, if they just added the reference to looking for the man page on the http://people.freebsd.org/~picobsd/ page, it would at least point a few more people in the proper direction. --Eric From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 11 16:46:07 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C003C16A4CE for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:46:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from freebie.dcfinc.com (freebie.dcfinc.com [205.159.99.240]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D27E43D31 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:46:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from chad@freeway.dcfinc.com) Received: from freeway.dcfinc.com (chad@[192.168.8.7]) by freebie.dcfinc.com (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i1C0k62w075124; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:46:06 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from chad@freeway.dcfinc.com) Received: (from chad@localhost) by freeway.dcfinc.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA22034; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:46:05 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from chad) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:46:05 -0700 From: "Chad R. Larson" To: "Bruce R. Montague" Message-ID: <20040211174605.E21893@freeway.dcfinc.com> References: <200402100031.i1A0VDX8000625@mail.cruzio.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200402100031.i1A0VDX8000625@mail.cruzio.com>; from brucem@mail.cruzio.com on Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 04:31:13PM -0800 cc: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PicoBSD diskless embedded 'where to start' X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:46:07 -0000 On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 04:31:13PM -0800, Bruce R. Montague wrote: > Although I've looked at the m0n0BSD and miniBSD pages a > few times, I don't know that much about them. Did m0n0BSD > replace the rc scripts with an alternative? miniBSD looks > like a good set of notes and manual procedures - good > documentation - showing one way to copy and strip-down > FreeBSD to compact flash. Yes, the m0n0BSD has replaced all the /etc/rc.* files and various other hidie configurations with a single XML file, which is maintained and read by PHP scripts. miniBSD is more of a traditional "stripped down" FreeBSD, somewhere bigger than picoBSD but smaller than the live bootable CD. It will run out of someting like a 64MB CF card. -crl -- Chad R. Larson (CRL15) 602-953-1392 Brother, can you paradigm? chad@dcfinc.com chad@larsons.org larson1@home.com DCF, Inc. - 14623 North 49th Place, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254-2207