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

Re: Debian boot system

On Sat, 07 Oct 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > On Sat, 07 Oct 2000, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> My main concern about doing this is this:
> make lives in /usr/bin.  Does make itself require anything from /usr?  
> How hard is it to make make live on the root partition?

Not hard at all, I think. ldd for make tells me it only needs glibc and
ld-linux.so. The make package doesn't list anything else which is required
to get it to run.

Yes, it *will* be strange to have make in /bin, but this particular point is
the least of my worries. One can try to provide a custom, smallisher
/bin/initmake or something like that.

> In order for this to work during install, make would have to be part of 
> base.  Can the base disks absorb another 128K binary?  Right now, make 

Don't worry about base. Try to change the default sysvinit with this scheme
for good (as opposed as providing it as a optional replacement) and you'll
never be able to get it past debian-policy, I fear.

> > Basically, all that needs to be specified, are the dependencies.  As I 

This is a bit more complicated than you seem to make the problem to be, but
yes. That's all that's needed alright.

> > already have specified roughly, in my Makefile draft (that works fine, btw), 
> > and took about 5 minutes to make.
> Could you post your Makefile draft (and what other steps you had to 
> make for this to work)?  Do you have /bin and /usr/bin on separate 
> partitions?

Yes, please. I want to read it as well. Please attach *all* the data you
have used to come up with 30 seconds (don't forget to specify the system you
measured, either :^P), as 30 seconds IS gain enough to justify deploying
this scheme of yours.

  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

Attachment: pgpW9v2cJeWVI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: