RE: Embedded Debian, the 5 lb bag.
Actually for the moment there are two approaches for emdebian. The mini-debian
and embedsys. Embedsys is aimed at very small systems and is already quite
complete. The second option is being discussed, but as I feel it we are
already digging into the details. Because there is a need for a small Debian
that scales well from quite small to larger uclibc was chosen. You don't
actually lose a lot of functionality by using this, but you gain a
considerable amount of space. So people with a system that for example has no
acces to a cf-disk or so, but "only" to about 32 to 128 MB of flash can also
use this emdebian branch. Also I think one of the important features should be
cross-compile-ability. The main idea was to add some rules to the standard
Debian source packages to allow an easy build of the emdebian binary packages
and as such be consistent with the bigger Debian. For the moment several
aspects of this are not yet defined and there are some approaches and
developments we could use to reach that final goal. So any comments or ideas
are welcome. However please try to read some of the mails in which this has
been discussed to have an idea what has already been thought of, how "we" (the
people where I already discussed it with and myself) see it.
A good place to catch up is:
and the IMHO most interesting thread is 'Emdebian 'shrunken debian scheme'.
Quoting DHollenbeck <email@example.com>:
> - Stick with glibc, so I can nfs root mount to my development system,
> can run custom binaries I make there using standard approaches.
This is handy but not relevant IF we are doing cross-compilation, so you still
need a different library in this case.
> enough space for glibc on the target flash and I will have to support
> the same programs on a desktop linux as what runs on the target. (There
> is a development system for my target custom binaries. This decision is
> critical, since it allows me to maintain only one set of binaries.) No
> offense to Erik's unbelievable work, I am just not enthused about the
> hassles of using uclibc. The days of small space are going away fast,
> thanks to digital camaras primarily.
By my knowledge there is still quite a substansial market for 8-bit
microcontrollers with very little memory. As such I also expect that there
will also be a market in the future for systems with very little memory, just
because the cost is not justified for the needed functionality. You don't use
a quad XEON with 4GB of RAM and 20 TB of disk as a desktop computer? (however
I would like to :-) )
Quoting "Ken Emmons, Jr." <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> I guess I'd have to agree mostly with you two.
> It seems that it would be difficult at best to satisfy the needs of someone
> who wishes to do "extreme embedded linux" with *any* distribution. I am
> probably correct in saying that most people out there will be using compact
> flash of some sort, probably 32MB and up, and you can actually fit the
> kernel, BASH, GLibC, X windows and a web server on this with room to spare
> (If done carefully, of course).
But we can always try to reach most of them. And if they are not satisfied
they can try with another alternative.
> Furthermore, doing the project with GlibC would mean that re-compilation of
> Debian binaries is not necessary. Why can't embedded debian be done withjust
> a modified package installer? Things like dependencies would perhaps be
> different, but the same package files coud even be used.
This is more or less the approach of embedsys (if I did understand it well
because I haven't used it yet). Big drawback is that software management is
not easy. Also try to consider the dependency problem. It could well be that
the system has to be adapted each time a standard Debian package has some
> Maybe I am discussing an old argument here, I don't know, but does this make
I hope I cleared up some things for all of you,
PS:Also take a look at the recently updated (thanks to Wookey) emdebian site
| Philippe De Swert -GNU/linux - uClinux freak-
| "GNU is the way"
| Please do not send me documents in a closed format. (*.doc,*.xls,*.ppt)
| Use the open alternatives. (*.pdf,*.ps,*.html,*.txt)
| Why? http://pallieter.is-a-geek.org:7832/~johan/word/english/
Gestuurd via het webmailsysteem van het De Nayer Instituut: www.denayer.be