From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 31 20:05:33 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: small@freebsd.org 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 5F2EE16A420; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:05:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (vc4-2-0-87.dsl.netrack.net [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E29643D6B; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:05:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k0VK5CNe036373; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:05:12 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:05:24 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20060131.130524.66709261.imp@bsdimp.com> To: rwatson@freebsd.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20060131195637.U95776@fledge.watson.org> References: <20060131105224.A57698@xorpc.icir.org> <20060131.121559.127178102.imp@bsdimp.com> <20060131195637.U95776@fledge.watson.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0 (harmony.bsdimp.com [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:05:13 -0700 (MST) Cc: rizzo@icir.org, current@freebsd.org, small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] what do we do with picobsd ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:05:33 -0000 In message: <20060131195637.U95776@fledge.watson.org> Robert Watson writes: : : On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, M. Warner Losh wrote: : : > Given how intertwingled picobsd is to the underly OS, I think you are going : > to have a hard time getting to #3. #2 is fine with me. : : My feelings here are pretty much the same -- I'm skeptical about the continued : ability to maintain PicoBSD outside CVS in a long-term way, given tight : integration with the source tree. People can and do maintain there own : versions of FreeBSD releases and wrappers (FreeSBIE is presumably the most : successful example), but it's a lot of work, and if there's trouble finding : enough hands for the current PicoBSD, it doesn't seem likely it will get more : hands somewhere else. Our company maintains its own release tools that would fall somewhere between PicoBSD and NanoBSD. We've tried very hard to make them version independent, but it is a constant struggle. Warner