From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 31 21:29:00 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 77EA816A43E; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:28:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from a50.ironport.com (a50.ironport.com [63.251.108.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15FC143D45; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:28:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from unknown (HELO [10.251.17.229]) ([10.251.17.229]) by a50.ironport.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2006 13:28:57 -0800 Message-ID: <43DFD698.7040508@elischer.org> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:28:56 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.11) Gecko/20050727 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Poul-Henning Kamp References: <3281.1138742578@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <3281.1138742578@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: rizzo@icir.org, rwatson@freebsd.org, small@freebsd.org, current@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 21:29:00 -0000 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >In message <20060131.131654.134137067.imp@bsdimp.com>, "M. Warner Losh" writes: > > >>In message: <43DFC2D5.7040706@errno.com> >> Sam Leffler writes: >> >> > > > >>Since I've started working on the bring up on an ARM based board, I've >>been wanting something that is easy to work with and that worked. I >>think it would help us a lot in the embedded space if we had something >>integrated into the base OS to do this stuff. >> >> > >I agree. I think we need to be much more inclusive in our concept of >a 'release' than we are now. > >As I see it, PicoBSD with its "additive" approach would cover the >low-capacity (<32 MB ?) range, NanoBSD with its "subtractive" approach >takes over from there, FreeSBIE covers the "don't touch my disk" >range and finally the full blown release as we know it. > > I'd like to see us take the freesbie release into the tree somewhere (since it uses so many ports, maybe in ports, or maybe in tools)