From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: PATCH [0/3]: Simplify the kernel build by removing perl. Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 04:49:34 -0500 Message-ID: <20090102094934.GB17841@infradead.org> References: <200901020207.30359.rob@landley.net> <200901021026.37905.a.miskiewicz@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200901021026.37905.a.miskiewicz@gmail.com> Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Arkadiusz Miskiewicz Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Landley , Embedded Linux mailing list , Andrew Morton , "H. Peter Anvin" , Sam Ravnborg On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 10:26:37AM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > On Friday 02 of January 2009, Rob Landley wrote: > > Before 2.6.25 (specifically git bdc807871d58285737d50dc6163d0feb72cb0dc2 ) > > building a Linux kernel never required perl to be installed on the build > > system. (Various development and debugging scripts were written in perl > > and python and such, but they weren't involved in actually building a > > kernel.) Building a kernel before 2.6.25 could be done with a minimal > > system built from gcc, binutils, bash, make, busybox, uClibc, and the Linux > > kernel, and nothing else. > > And now bash is going to be required... while some distros don't need/have > bash. /bin/sh should be enough. *nod* bash is in many ways a worse requirement than perl. strict posix /bin/sh + awk + sed would be nicest, but if that's too much work perl seems reasonable.