In message: <200211151029.gAFATBmQ008076@apollo.backplane.com>
Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> writes:
: I think you are missing the whole point of having a mini-c. And I also
: do not agree with you *AT ALL* in regards to anything having to be
: reverted. Mini-C by necessity would exist for those people who want
: a tiny /bin. You don't have to use it. Nor is Mini-C necessarily
I don't think that a mini-c will help at all. /bin can be scrunched
down to 500k and sbin to 605k on 4.5 and the system will still boot.
A full install is only 2842k when sbin/bin are dynamically linked. A
full static install is 15302k. mini-c would help in the static case,
but not at all in the dynamic case. If you have to have libc, et al,
on /, then the libraries used by sbin/bin are 1604k in size, which
cuts into your savings down to only 10M. A mini-c dynamic would help
a little in this case, but it can't help by more than 500k, which is
the size of libc. When both / and /usr are on the same partition,
your savings is 12M. I've booted 6M 4.5 systems, including kernel and
all binaries to boot as well as a few things like telnetd, etc.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message