Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:54:29 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: phk@phk.freebsd.dk Cc: small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "nanobsd" prototype Message-ID: <20040312.085429.14977435.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <59081.1079092493@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20040312115202.GA98578@numeri.campus.luth.se> <59081.1079092493@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <59081.1079092493@critter.freebsd.dk>
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
: 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" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> 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.
It is far too klunky, and not nearly granular enough. Both interfaces
(the SUBDIR_OVERRIDE_INSTALL and NO_FOO).
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040312.085429.14977435.imp>