From owner-freebsd-arch  Mon Jul 17 18:18:10 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED03437B78E
	for <arch@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e6I1HtL26327;
	Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:17:55 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:17:55 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: Boris Popov <bp@butya.kz>
Cc: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Conditionally removing cosmetic messages for small kernels (PICOBSD).
Message-ID: <20000717181754.A13979@fw.wintelcom.net>
References: <20000717152514.A2056@mithrandr.moria.org> <Pine.BSF.4.10.10007180652010.78682-100000@lion.butya.kz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10007180652010.78682-100000@lion.butya.kz>; from bp@butya.kz on Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 07:06:57AM +0700
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

* Boris Popov <bp@butya.kz> [000717 17:07] wrote:
> 
> 	A more general question: should we allow more options to exclude
> optional and obsolete parts of the kernel ? For example, I've ripped out
> aout, aio and jail related code without any effect on functionality for my
> particular system.

I'm sure our friends in the embedded systems world would say yes. :)

-Alfred


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