Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 22:22:48 -0400 From: Quartz <quartz@sneakertech.com> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: FreeBSD questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Questions about freebsd-update Message-ID: <559F2C78.6090102@sneakertech.com> In-Reply-To: <20150710040949.42c73f4d.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <559C6B73.8050509@sneakertech.com> <559EA8B8.8080701@sneakertech.com> <559ED47E.8050905@hiwaay.net> <559F25F8.1030508@sneakertech.com> <559F2853.5000103@sneakertech.com> <20150710040949.42c73f4d.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> I should clarify: I know it's possible to do this by downloading the >> patch/asc files and doing the whole make/install dance, but that >> requires all the build tools to be installed which is awkward on >> dedicated systems that need a small footprint. > > The tools involved here are already part of the base system (except > they got manually removed, which renders the OS somehow incomplete). > A system installation typically uses compiler, assembler, linker, > installer, and make, which are all contained in the base distribution > of the OS. Wait.... isn't all the build stuff part of the 'src' option during install? If you unselect that, how does make/install apply patches if the files it's patching aren't there? >However, resource limitations might be a problem - even > though nobody admits this possibility today anymore. ;-) Not having to install that ~1G of stuff would help a lot on some systems, especially those booting off a small flash memory device.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?559F2C78.6090102>