Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:38:35 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "nanobsd" prototype Message-ID: <200403111535.25476.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <53045.1079035854@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <53045.1079035854@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 11 March 2004 03:10 pm, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message > <Pine.BSF.4.21.0403111202000.87340-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>, Ju > > lian Elischer writes: > >On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > > > >[...] > > > >> mkdir /usr/src/nanobsd > > > >[...] > > > >> Feedback of all sorts most welcome! And more documentation > >> to arrive as it gets written. > > > >wouldn't it make sense to put nanoBSD in release alongside picoBSD? > >(that still leaves us microBSD and milliBSD :-) > > As I understand it picoBSD has never managed the 4.x->5.x transition > and is scheduled to be removed if nobody starts paying attention > to it soon. > > re@/scottl@ asked me to not put nanobsd in src/release as they would > prefer it be kept for the "official release" stuff only, and to > me src/tools actually makes a lot more sense after all. I've actually wanted to use src/release/freebsd/ for the "official" FreeBSD release bits so that src/release/fooBSD could be used for the "foo" dist. picoBSD really should move more to a nano type model if it stays around anyways. Using splitfs should make it much easier to keep picoBSD around actually, and to do what some people have long wanted: have the release floppies actually be a 'release' picoBSD dist. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200403111535.25476.jhb>