From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sat Apr 23 19:47:55 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 93B1CB1AACA for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 19:47:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-io0-x22a.google.com (mail-io0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B5701D38 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 19:47:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-io0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id f89so121120276ioi.0 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 12:47:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=xGAIrkW45L/b2sxXZiScEXsw5UBFOJTjV951dC9ywoE=; b=kTqy3ashGJLWliC+AIjR5F1tbNVMRsFPrVTyR9f/40UehsukMyierFEEh4f/FGaDJR vup8QwqokuPFTfHcckPj5QGKiS1IE/GO+KRdhr2k/g5B0pTdnd3QktPWUtPpp2IgKIUg 63lf72jQ/KyOgLVwwF6SVK/m4QsbNCuJHYmm5qiWN2R/iiJQeVRaXW8eU+SCLcpgFSbM M2YhZATPrj1iWfuTgwHgUf9pOYSpdZ9mtvPs23nIP5N91v3gQDERpMpXs96ljxyQW2jF hPwgB/RpT9Wu1T9omm3bL2VRAMc2W9U3GWXRaRGcf7ZCCHbpoJ1aXdd5hYrerPju3Bja 2xeg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=xGAIrkW45L/b2sxXZiScEXsw5UBFOJTjV951dC9ywoE=; b=c62RD6YzWhluF40sftHcG2vMxirrb/6HrvUMMm/UUTNozy/oQtvD588Ahara9dWDaB l4LVWLTLtqDHlSS4a8QQxmCXZ+iPH/jUi/vFNigdqAM6wHL38N6VsYGBVLHilq34/SJt xGh+Vy9c9TOiaVEXH990lFZbYa2HQyQtnMy670+rOOnXlc2UuI4TLy1pDw1ufgZc08/l 4XFpIq+hrpwpagL3nm4NUDorD0ZH041YAvCGc0UUDTi4zSCnrO09Mt4c1qTjNtj+QjiM f6CsFXfb+/L7LXM+uxx/5o8Nw6v041B0hPa5J/svreIYwcjcsTuQze2Xzf2C6ZSyAvC6 ofrg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXR0IPDomrLYOONFZarQSStTtaODXEstOoL50Tyj9eIUn+8MrIsoA8gpe6hD4e2jI4UuE1In14waaBH3Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.192.129 with SMTP id q123mr29934179iof.197.1461440874831; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 12:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.104.197 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Apr 2016 12:47:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [50.253.99.174] In-Reply-To: References: <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> <5716AD65.8070007@shrew.net> Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2016 13:47:54 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ggu8TRC01iL-zUiftfTFfSFBE1g Message-ID: Subject: Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8)) From: Warner Losh To: Daniel Eischen Cc: FreeBSD Current Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.21 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 19:47:55 -0000 On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote: > [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? What do you mean by that, exactly? It would be relatively easy to add a step that runs dump on the _.disk.image file and squirrel that away. Last orders the code currently calls it, I believe. Is it something as simple as this, or is there some more complexity that I'm failing to understand or grasp? Warner