From owner-freebsd-current Mon Nov 2 02:36:33 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA17302 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 2 Nov 1998 02:36:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from korin.warman.org.pl (korin.nask.waw.pl [148.81.160.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA17293 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 1998 02:36:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from abial@nask.pl) Received: from localhost (abial@localhost) by korin.warman.org.pl (8.9.1/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA25076; Mon, 2 Nov 1998 11:41:12 +0100 (CET) X-Authentication-Warning: korin.warman.org.pl: abial owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 11:41:11 +0100 (CET) From: Andrzej Bialecki X-Sender: abial@korin.warman.org.pl To: Mike Smith cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: New boot loader and alternate kernels In-Reply-To: <199811020131.RAA07047@dingo.cdrom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 1 Nov 1998, Mike Smith wrote: > > > It builds a little bigger here; it weighs in at about 40k. If you > > > strip the OO extensions out it comes down to about 22k. I don't know > > > > I stripped LOCALS, multithreading, stack checking, but added KEY... Well, > > this is still around 20k. > > Ok. Should I commit my working version so that we have a central place > to perform the strip-down and integration? Yes, that would be convenient. > > > whether there's much we can strip from the core wordset; I'll leave > > > that for the FORTH guruen to argue over. At 22k (plus whatever it > > > > As I said above, we probably can strip CORE-EXT and SEARCH - I wouldn't > > touch the CORE itself, however. > > Again, being not much of a Forth head it's not clear whether we should > keep all of the compiled-in functionality and just strip the things > that can be reloaded at runtime. > > I guess that items that are of principal interest to a programmer should > be conditionalised out, ie. produce a BFDK and a BFRT. 8) Ehm... What? > > Great! I think we won't regret it... > > I hope not. 8) I'm all in favour of extension languages but I'm still > in two minds about whether Forth is going to be the right one for this > job. Well, most of things the bootloader currently does is pretty straightforward in terms of "words", and would require only very few magic incantations. Then, the next part could be hidden behind non-Forth-like words after loading some /boot/forth_haters.4th... Andrzej Bialecki -------------------- ++-------++ ------------------------------------- ||PicoBSD|| FreeBSD in your pocket? Go and see: Research & Academic |+-------+| "Small & Embedded FreeBSD" Network in Poland | |TT~~~| | http://www.freebsd.org/~picobsd/ -------------------- ~-+==---+-+ ------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message