Well it mainly means that either TINY should be split out from including 
anything in the normal builds or the "standard" list really is pruned down
to just the essentials.

TINY is kind of a 1 off for x86. 

James

>
>Moved to tech-install; source-changes remains in the envelope.
>
>David Brownlee <abs@netbsd.org> wrote on Thu,  6 Feb 2003
>at 13:37:03 +0000 in <Pine.NEB.4.53.0302061336070.364@dev.6nations.co.uk>:
>
>> I think the criteria for TINY should be 'has a hope of working
>> on 4MB machines', and as such any increase in size should be
>> avoided whenever possible...
>
>This seems reasonable criteria.
>However there's no good way to do it with the current implementation.
>
>One should be able to say "in all sets except TINY," or otherwise
>usefully express exclusions. Would you care to implement [or suggest
>implementation] of a good way to do that?
>
>--jhawk
>
>> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:37:03 +0000 (GMT)
>> From: David Brownlee <abs@netbsd.org>
>> To: Luke Mewburn <lukem@netbsd.org>
>> cc: John Hawkinson <jhawk@MIT.EDU>, source-changes@netbsd.org
>> Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/distrib/utils/sysinst
>> In-Reply-To: <20030122215951.GQ6481@mewburn.net>
>> Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.53.0302061336070.364@dev.6nations.co.uk>
>> 
>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Luke Mewburn wrote:
>> 
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 11:33:47AM -0500, John Hawkinson wrote:
>> >   |
>> >   | > 	Should this be optional based on -DSMALL or similar?
>> >   | > 	(For TINY install media)
>> >   |
>> >   | I am uncertain what the full set of criteria for TINY is.
>> >   | It appeared to me that it did not overfill install media, but
>> >   | I did not test for all architectures.
>> >   |
>> >   | Pragmatically, because it is difficult to add a file to
>> >   | "all but some" architectures, I did it this wy.
>> >   |
>> >   | If it proves a problem, we could revisit it...is that the wrong
>> >   | attitude for TINY?
>> >
>> > If all the distrib media build (and even better, if you tested them;
>> > I recall that you've asked for more testing of these things ;-), then
>> > it's fine to leave your change.
>> 
>> 	I think the criteria for TINY should be 'has a hope of working
>> 	on 4MB machines', and as such any increase in size should be
>> 	avoided whenever possible...
>> -- 
>> 		David/absolute          -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --
>
>
>