tinybsd- ports question

[Bruce Simpson]

security wrote:
> I'm really torn between nano and tiny.  I like nano's ability to skip
> the world and kernel builds and the "extra" boot partition.  Tiny has a
> much more elegant ports handler and is smart about getting the world
> binaries from the host.  Tiny needs less space, but with flash getting
> so cheap, it's less of an important factor for me.  I do realize other
> embedded uses might find that more important.
>   

[general hand waving]
The fact that TinyBSD copies binaries from the host was always what 
caused me to side-step it; try doing that on a non-i386 machine, or for 
a non-i386 target.

Having said that, it would be really cool if someone could blend the 
strengths of both into NanoBSD... surely the ports stuff is not too 
difficult to merge in? The only thing really missing which is needed, 
sadly, is cross-compilation support -- but you can spend years doing 
that. OpenEmbedded certainly isn't an answer.

You don't need to rebuild everything in NanoBSD at once if you don't 
want to.

cheers
BMS