Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 10:25:34 +0200 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: gnn@freebsd.org Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@haven.freebsd.dk>, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org, Garance A Drosehn <gad@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Summary: experiences with NanoBSD, successes and nits on a Soekris 4801 Message-ID: <28930.1120465534@phk.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 04 Jul 2005 10:00:28 %2B0900." <m2fyuv75cj.wl%gnn@neville-neil.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <m2fyuv75cj.wl%gnn@neville-neil.com>, gnn@freebsd.org writes: >At Mon, 20 Jun 2005 08:36:07 +0200, >Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> The trouble with options like this is that they escape our normal >> build tests. >> >> A good example of this is the kernel option INET which in theory >> is optional, but which on average only is it 10% of the time. > >The only way to get this to work, IMHO, is to take the full system, >and generate a dependency graph, if that's even possible. Then you >know where to cut and where new APIs need to be defined to know where >to cut. I'll try to generate this as part of the scripts on >code-speluking.org. I played with developing that graph by removing lines from LINT and see what compiled and what didn't. Based on the progress I made I would estimate the full graph will take about 1 CPU-year to calculate by trial&error. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?28930.1120465534>