TinyBSD Call For Testers
eksffa at freebsdbrasil.com.br
Tue Jul 19 19:18:38 GMT 2005
Igor Pokrovsky wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 03:17:52PM -0300, Jean Milanez Melo wrote:
>>In the last saturday a new port has been added under sysutils/ category,
>>ports/sysutils/tinybsd. TinyBSD is a tool which was meant to allow an
>>easy way to build embedded systems based on FreeBSD. It is based on
>>userland copying, library dependencies check/copy and kernel build.
> What's wrong with PicoBSD?
PicoBSD is architectural different.
It is a single crunched program which once loaded is kept always in
memory, while live systems such as TinyBSD, nanobsd, and usually live
CDs load to memory what it needs from the main storage device (cf card,
pendrive, cd, whatever). So it is different at all. After that, PicoBSD
worked very fine before the last releases on RELENG_4, while at RELENG_5
it became quite hard to build without problems. I personally enjoy
PicoBSD a lot, but it is not an available choice nowadays, 'cos of
building issues. On the other hand, Luigi has recently made a number of
changes which puts PicoBSD back into "yes, it builds" state, which is
great! But in RELENG_5 it stills not accomplishing its goal stated in
picobsd(8), which is:
picobsd -- floppy disk based FreeBSD system
..."try to keep them functional and fitting in the 1.44MB floppy despite
the unavoidable increases in the size of the kernel and its applications"
In fact fs.picobsd has ~ 1.4MB, plus the kernel, which could take it to
~3MB total size. Maybe in a 2.8 floppy it would fit today, but it is
somehow different from what used to be in RELENG_4.
Anyway, there is nothing wrong w/ PicoBSD. It is just different.
FreeBSD Brasil LTDA.
(31) 3281-9633 / 3281-3547
"Long live Hanin Elias, Kim Deal!"
More information about the freebsd-small