Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 03:52:13 -0700 From: Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: build tools as separate distribution Message-ID: <200008301052.DAA05440@salsa.gv.tsc.tdk.com> In-Reply-To: <xzp3djn9h2o.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> References: <xzp3djn9h2o.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Aug 30, 12:30pm, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: } Subject: build tools as separate distribution } What would the good people think of moving gcc, gas, ld etc., as well } as include files and static libraries out of the bin dist and into a } separate distribution, called e.g. prog or devel? There are a lot of } cases (e.g. firewalls, mail gateways) where you neither need nor want } build tools, and PicoBSD is sometimes too radical. This would provide } a sort of middle path between the too-minimalist PicoBSD and the } not-minimalist-enough bin dist we have today. I'm in favor of it and have even done this in the past (other than the static libraries) as a local hack to 2.1. This is pretty easy to implement, though I recall having problems disentangling ld with some non-optional things like ldconfig and ld.so. I also did the same thing for lpr, sendmail, uucp, and the r-commands. The only difficult part is making the necessary changes to sysinstall. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200008301052.DAA05440>