Summary: experiences with NanoBSD, successes and nits on a
Soekris 4801
Robert Watson
rwatson at FreeBSD.org
Mon Jun 20 19:26:31 GMT 2005
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>> Actually, looking at the code, it would cause devd to be built, but
>> not installed without changes. Since NO_GXX is defined in the above
>> scenario. I've started to think about how this might be fixed. It
>> really is a 'don't build this because of toolchain depends' as a
>> 'don't build his because I don't want this feature' intertwinglement.
>
> Also, what about dynamic executables that need libstdc++, but you still
> don't want the build tools?
I'm trying to remember the reason NO_CXX actually exists -- I believe it's
because our sparc64 port didn't have working C++ for some period of time,
so we didn't build C++ (and its dependencies). It could well be that
NO_CXX is OBE, and we can eliminate it entirely? I.e., C++ support
libraries and applications are now a basic requirement as DHCP is broken
without them?
Robert N M Watson
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list