Re: busybox still too bloated
David Kimdon <dwhedon@dualmedia.fr> 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 <andersen@codepoet.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
for it.
> tab completion and command line editing on b-f would be really nice,
> and as a bonus we save space.
Amazingly nice.
> 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..<adam@onshore-devel.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>
Reply to: