Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:07:15 +0100 (BST)
From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Cc: current@freebsd.org, small@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: {pico, tiny, nano}BSD, FreesBIE
Message-ID: <20061012140646.R10593@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <452D7EC6.5080302@elischer.org>
References: <452D6C90.7020703@FreeBSD.org> <452D7EC6.5080302@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Julian Elischer wrote: > Some people have asked me about why we have so many different ways to make > images.. > > I had a quick look for a page on the site that holds this sort of thing but > didn't spot it.. Sounds like precisely this list of differences should be in the handbook or such somewhere. :-) Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge > > Here's quick comparison from my perspective. > > In order of increasing size: > > PicoBSD compiles from the given sources and can thus build cross > revision, or with a lot more tailored stuff. > Using the crunch gives TRULY tiny images.. (a 4MB image is > possible I think) A bit fiddly but the only way to go on a > machine with a really small image requirement. > I like it for [34]86 class machines with 8MB ram. > (If you can get a boot media) > it used to be possible to get it all on a floppy but I don;t think > that is now possible due to kernel growth. > > NanoBSD compiles, and is capable of being set to build a cross image of > a different architecture. > Different compile options can be used from the build system, > e.g. you could leave out support for kerberos or similar and get a > different version of telnet. > > TinyBSD uses the precompiled binaries on the building system. Thus it > can not make a crossbuilt image, or one based on a different > revision. (It does however make a custom kernel) It is however > REALLY fast.. It is interactive to some extent and can make an image which > will run off the boot media or create a memory filesystem > image. (select at build time). In size it is similar to > NanoBSD but 'simpler', though less flexible. Still needs a little > work for running off a USB stick but works fine in mfs mode. > > FreeSBIE is another option. it is designed to make not only a > basic image but to include all sorts of packages and possibly > configure them. Targetted at media the size of a CD. > it builds everything from scratch and can this be very tailored. > more flexible than tinyBSD, but more work too. > > In addition there is Monowall and pfsense (monowall.org, pfsense.com) > though I haven't played with them. > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061012140646.R10593>