Le lundi 03 juillet 2006 à 20:46 +0200, maximilian attems a écrit : > well but busybox is big nowadays and generally compiled against glibc. > i'm quite eager to kick busybox out of default Debian initramfs-tools > to have an klibc only default initramfs. those tools are needed atm, > and there is not enough yet. afaik suse adds sed on klibc with a minimal > patch and we'd liked to have stat, kill and readlink on klibc-utils. > > how about busybox on klibc? I made a brief attempt to do busybox on klibc before klcc was working right for me. I should try that again. In Ubuntu, we already do a separate build pass of busybox to get just the features that we want, it would be easy to play with this. I'll let you know. It'll take me a couple days - between travelling and the long weekend, I'm a bit behind. Tks, Jeff Bailey -- * Canonical Ltd * Ubuntu Service and Support * +1 514 691 7221 * Linux for Human Beings.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [klibc] klibc and what's the next step?
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [klibc] klibc and what's the next step?
- References:
- Re: klibc and what's the next step?
- From: Rob Landley <[email protected]>
- Re: [klibc] klibc and what's the next step?
- From: maximilian attems <[email protected]>
- Re: klibc and what's the next step?
- Prev by Date: D-Link DUB-E100 Revision B1
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC 0/4] Object reclaim via the slab allocator V1
- Previous by thread: Re: [klibc] klibc and what's the next step?
- Next by thread: Re: [klibc] klibc and what's the next step?
- Index(es):
 |