[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Problems with building the Alpha-bootdisks



On Wed Jul 25, 2001 at 06:00:59PM +0200, Thimo Neubauer wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 09:26:47AM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
> > If you find stuff that is enabled that shouldn't be, please do let me/us know
> > by posting to the list.  I'm about to make a new busybox package in the next
> > hour or two, so now would be a good time to mention any needed changes.  Of
> > course, there are many new releases where this one came from if you find things
> > later on...
> 
> Well, I hope that this might save some precious space on the disk:
> could you enable all the module-stuff (insmod, modprobe, ...)? On

The busybox module stuff is platform specific, and only right now, busybox
insmod only supports x86, ARM, SH3/4, powerpc, m68k, and MIPS.  And so if I
enable it I will get unkind emails from the autobuilders on alpha, sparc, ia64
and all other unsupported platforms...

> Alpha the real binaries eat about 130k and the busybox-binary 282k. If
> there are no problems, "route" may also be activated, even if it is
> only 87k in size, but remember that we need ~200k extra-space
> (compressed!) on the rootdisk to get everything squeezed on a
> 1.4M-floppy.
> 
> How is the shell-part of busybox? Is it useable and compatible enough
> to run all the shellscripts needed for the boot-process? I just ask
> because ash has annother 150k :)

Busybox's ash is quite small -- it adds about 70k (with command line
editing and history enabled).  The only thing it lacks (soon to be
remedied) is posix math support.

> Well, I don't know if putting all of this in busybox will actually
> save that much space but IMHO it is worth looking into it (if it
> works).

I'm on vacation (back late Saturday) and I'll look into things then,

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen   email:  andersee@debian.org, andersen@lineo.com
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--

Attachment: pgpaDItxnf7aE.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: