From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sat Apr 23 13:51:47 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24F0B12A4D for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 13:51:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.netplex.net", Issuer "RapidSSL SHA256 CA - G3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FCC11D41 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 13:51:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.netplex.net (8.15.1/8.15.1/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id u3NDpdj5035690; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 09:51:39 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net) X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9]); Sat, 23 Apr 2016 09:51:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2016 09:51:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net Reply-To: Daniel Eischen To: Warner Losh cc: FreeBSD Current Subject: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> <5716AD65.8070007@shrew.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2016 13:51:47 -0000 [CC trimmed] On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: > > I personally will be refraining from engaging further. I plan on seeing > what gaps there are by adding support to NanoBSD for packages. I'll be busy > with that. In talking to Glen and others, we've already identified a few > easy gaps to fill. Once they've done that, I'll get going on NanoBSD with > the goal to be able to use it to build a bootable system of any > architecture from packages with no root privs. I expect to find issues, but > I don't expect to find any issue that's intractable. I expect after the > issues are resolved, the end product will be better for everybody. Thank you for working on NanoBSD. Do you think it would be possible to add support for optionally building dump(8) images instead of dd? -- DE