Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 24 Apr 2000 10:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu>
To:        "Edward W. Akeyson" <eakeyson@earthlink.net>
Cc:        freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Iopener & PicoBSD ramblings
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004240955210.73904-100000@resnet.uoregon.edu>
In-Reply-To: <NDBBIDOKILFAGOJNPOELKEENCDAA.eakeyson@earthlink.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 22 Apr 2000, Edward W. Akeyson wrote:

> 1. Failure of PicoBSD on 3.4-stable system due to errors during crunch
> process (output below).

Important rule: 'make clean' in /usr/src/ before before building PicoBSD.  
It will happily find files from a world build and use them.  PicoBSD
depends on being able to set NO_PAM to disable the pam links in login, and
if you have a build there the make won't pick it up.  

I should patch PicoBSD to reset OBJDIR so this doesn't happen.

> 2. I have read on the FreeBSD-small mailing list that there are some
> problems with PicoBSD. Is it better in 4.0-stable? I have been contemplating
> upgrading my main system to 4.0, and this would likely push me in that
> direction.

There are patches pending for -CURRENT, mainly revolving around the kernel
options necessary to maintain the compatibility shims for non-newbus
drivers.  I'm in the process of testing that patch (once I get a clean
copy).  I think this also applies to 4.X, but I'll have to try building on
that (and fixing -CURRENT) before making any promises.  

Greg's make-based builder in custom/ may also have this flexibility, I've
never looked at it.

> 3. Is PicoBSD the best development platform for a 16MB image (space not so
> tight)- should I move in the direction of hand assembling my own image file
> without MFS, etc. as done in PicoBSD?

Yes, it'll work fine.  You may want to specify your own type and hack it
into the build scripts so you don't have to keep redefining the image
size, and add a disktab entry so PicoBSD can label the final image
properly. Don't forget the filesystem size is the *expanded* image size,
and it gets compressed, so it can be significanly larger than your
available storage.  For instance the install image is 2400KB but it
compresses down to just over 1024KB. :)
 
Doug White                    |  FreeBSD: The Power to Serve
dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu     |  www.FreeBSD.org



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0004240955210.73904-100000>