Re: busybox still too bloated
David Kimdon <email@example.com> writes:
> Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 11:09:02AM -0600 wrote:
> > On Tue Sep 25, 2001 at 12:04:28PM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> > > Erik Andersen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > > I suspect that all of the following could probably be eliminated: ar, date,
> > > > echo, env, expr, gzip, halt, lsmod, poweroff, wc, which, whoami.
> > Right. I can't think of a good reason for ar to be included.
> > echo dups a shell buildtin. lsmod duplicates moduilts (which we
> > are using due to limited arch support in busybox insmod). env and
> > expr duplicate shell functionality. date we can probably live
> > without. I'm sure we need gunzip, but gzip?
> > Probably safe to axe them all, but I wanted to double check in
> > case someone is using this stuff and I just don't know about it.
> At the moment 'Report a Problem' menu choice uses gzip, but the
> dependancy could be removed.
> If expr is really duplicated in the shell then we can remove it, I
> know it is used by dhcp-client.
Yah. I agree we should keep gzip. Supppose someone wants to edit a
keymap then re-gzip it, for instance.
The rest can go. What we should do is go ahead and do the busybox
changes, then we can test boot-floppies 3.0.15, and if that works, go
> tab completion and command line editing on b-f would be really nice,
> and as a bonus we save space.
> Erik, if you put a version together with all this removed, I can run
> an install and verify that things still work.
Yes, lets test with the ifconfig, route, and ash from busybox. Then
we should have plenty of space for all arches.
...Adam Di Carlo..<email@example.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>