From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 03:55:10 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 5617116A4CE; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 03:55:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8585E43D2D; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 03:55:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i2CBsrGG059082; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:54:53 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) To: Johan Karlsson From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:52:02 +0100." <20040312115202.GA98578@numeri.campus.luth.se> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:54:53 +0100 Message-ID: <59081.1079092493@critter.freebsd.dk> cc: freebsd@guldan.demon.nl cc: current@freebsd.org cc: small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "nanobsd" prototype 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: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:55:10 -0000 In message <20040312115202.GA98578@numeri.campus.luth.se>, Johan Karlsson write s: >On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 16:04 (-0700) +0000, M. Warner Losh wrote: >> In message: <52729.1079033952@critter.freebsd.dk> >> "Poul-Henning Kamp" writes: >> : I want nanobsd to use the normal build/installworld targets, but feel >> : free to prune your system in the Customize target. >> >> Maybe it is time to have a generic way to include/exclude directories >> from installworld, but not buildworld. > >We kind of have this already > ># make buildworld ># make installworld SUBDIR_OVERRIDE='dirs to include' > >I guess it would be trivial to add a new variable >SUBDIR_OVERRIDE_INSTALL that only affects the installworld >target if you need to put in make.conf. While this may technically be a possibility, it is a lousy userinterface to the FreeBSD hacker who's trying to configure an embedded system. I think the NO_FOO principle of functional exclusion is far more user friendly. -- 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.