Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:19:33 +0100 From: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> To: chad@DCFinc.com, grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) Cc: dr@dursec.com, dalcocer@home.com, abc@bsdi.com, glaess@element5.de, small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: picobsd on cdrom Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001019105640.00b17910@gid.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <200010190920.CAA01687@freeway.dcfinc.com> References: <20001014161651.W1489@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 02:20 19/10/00 -0700, Chad R. Larson wrote: > > Four or five different build directories in /usr/src/release/picobsd, > > most of them broken. The FreeBSD kernel has bloated considerably > > since 3.0, and I expect it to continue to do so. I think that it > > won't be long before a single (1.44 MB) floppy PicoBSD will not be > > possible with a -CURRENT or -RELEASE. > >I suggested this a bit earlier, but I'll try again. Perhaps the >PicoBSD project ought to standardize on the 2.2.x system. Is there >something that happened in 3.x or 4.x that is applicable to PicoBSD? Plenty. I'm looking at picobsd on -current right now, because I need USB modem support. While the standard pico builds are nice as templates, anyone using pico seriously should expect to do a custom build. My experience is that for what I'm doing (routers, serial console servers and the like) size isn't an issue, but I do prune kernel options and drivers ruthlessly. In any case, the 1.44MB floppy is an endangered species. CDROM booting is somewhat hit-and-miss, but compact flash and net boots are viable alternatives in many applications and don't have the size restriction. I think it would be a big mistake to fix pico on an old base release. -- Bob Bishop +44 (0)118 977 4017 rb@gid.co.uk fax +44 (0)118 989 4254 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20001019105640.00b17910>