From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jul  4 08:25:38 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B91D16A41C;
	Mon,  4 Jul 2005 08:25:38 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from haven.freebsd.dk (haven.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B995543D48;
	Mon,  4 Jul 2005 08:25:37 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.48.2])
	by haven.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id B84CFBC51;
	Mon,  4 Jul 2005 08:25:35 +0000 (UTC)
To: gnn@freebsd.org
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 04 Jul 2005 10:00:28 +0900."
	<m2fyuv75cj.wl%gnn@neville-neil.com> 
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 10:25:34 +0200
Message-ID: <28930.1120465534@phk.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@phk.freebsd.dk
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 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 08:25:38 -0000

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.