Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))

2016-04-24 Thread Warner Losh
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Sun, 24 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Daniel Eischen >> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen >>> wrote: [CC tri

Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))

2016-04-24 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote: On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote: [CC trimmed] On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: I personally will be refraining from enga

Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))

2016-04-24 Thread Warner Losh
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen >> wrote: >> >> [CC trimmed] >>> >>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: >>> >>> I personally will be refraining from engaging further. I

Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))

2016-04-24 Thread NGie Cooper
> On Apr 24, 2016, at 05:34, Daniel Eischen wrote: > >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: >> >> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen >> wrote: >> >>> [CC trimmed] >>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: I personally will be refraining from engaging

Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))

2016-04-24 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote: [CC trimmed] On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: I personally will be refraining from engaging further. I plan on seeing what gaps there are by adding support to NanoBSD for packages. I'll b

Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))

2016-04-23 Thread Warner Losh
On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote: > [CC trimmed] > > On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote: > >> >> I personally will be refraining from engaging further. I plan on seeing >> what gaps there are by adding support to NanoBSD for packages. I'll be >> busy >> with that. In talk