Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:48:11 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org> Cc: "Jeffrey S. Sharp" <jss@subatomix.com>, W Gerald Hicks <jhix@mindspring.com>, Albert Yang <albert@achtung.com>, freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The heart of the problem Message-ID: <200007251748.LAA21108@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:26:48 %2B0200." <20000725162648.A18036@mithrandr.moria.org> References: <20000725162648.A18036@mithrandr.moria.org> <200007250933.CAA06461@mindspring.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007250716060.8718-100000@lepton.subatomix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20000725162648.A18036@mithrandr.moria.org> Neil Blakey-Milner writes: : What do you think of the make(1)-based system in picobsd/custom at the : moment, and the Patrick's extensions to it (advertised a few days ago, : which I haven't had the necessary time to look at yet). : : I can't imagine there's a better approach than a make(1)-based system, : like the rest of the build. The power of our make(1) build systems : (ports, release, world, and now doc) is one of FreeBSD's great : strengths. : : Actually, while we're at it, can we get a list of the small FreeBSD kits : and their URLs? : : Perhaps we should move the PicoBSD web pages into the FreeBSD web page : space, so we can get CVS and stuff going. Any ideas, Andrzej? Hmmm, I'd like to see a better design and/or implementation before we get too far down the removing/moving picobsd stuff. I fear that we're entering a time of great fragmentation and want to avoid that if at all possible. Is there a design document on any of this? I'm putting together my flash building scripts and will ask for people to comment on them. It seems to me that we have two basic types of systems. First, we have crunchgen'd systems which are designed to be really small. Next we have non-crunchgen'd system that are designed to be a little larger, but maybe need more flexibility than crunchgen can give. Trying to bifricate into router/dialup/etc is going to be a big mess. We'd likely be better off defining "packages" of programs in the base system that we can then glue together at a higher level to create the system that we want. This will allow a more generic mixing and matching of system components and allow a higher level of automation than we have with the current config file system. I'll be the first to admit my scripts haven't taken this step, but they could almost trivially be adapoted to doing that. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200007251748.LAA21108>