[Buildroot] big root fs

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Zoran Djordjevic]

Hello
?
I built linux kernel using Buildroot, but included glibc support instead of
uClibc. For that matter I was using Crosstool NG. 
I achieved the goal - compiled the GTK?applications and they work on
my target ARM board. All of that is?by using?NFS on my Ubuntu machine.
However the size of generated jffs2 is 52MB- which is huge for me.
Although I included GTK examples, and maybe few more properties I still
wander if the size is related (only)?to glibc matter. 
I will try building with uClibc (only to detect difference in size), but at the 
moment it is important to me to use glibc, so what else can contribute to 
overal size of image, other than??(maybe) glibc. 
I attatched my .config if someone want to look at it and maybe find some 
memory eating matter. Also,?can size of glibc be reduced, by throwing
out some properties.
?
Regards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120911/a73951a3/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: .config
Type: application/xml
Size: 29821 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120911/a73951a3/attachment-0001.wsdl>

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Zoran" == Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> writes:

 Zoran> Hello

 Zoran> I built linux kernel using Buildroot, but included glibc support
 Zoran> instead of uClibc. For that matter I was using Crosstool NG.
 Zoran> I achieved the goal - compiled the GTK applications and they
 Zoran> work on my target ARM board. All of that is by using NFS on my
 Zoran> Ubuntu machine.  However the size of generated jffs2 is 52MB-
 Zoran> which is huge for me.  Although I included GTK examples, and
 Zoran> maybe few more properties I still wander if the size is related
 Zoran> (only) to glibc matter.  I will try building with uClibc (only
 Zoran> to detect difference in size), but at the moment it is important
 Zoran> to me to use glibc, so what else can contribute to overal size
 Zoran> of image, other than (maybe) glibc.  I attatched my .config if
 Zoran> someone want to look at it and maybe find some memory eating
 Zoran> matter. Also, can size of glibc be reduced, by throwing out some
 Zoran> properties.

First of all, a defconfig file (which you create by running 'make
savedefconfig')  is quite a bit easier to read than the very verbose
.config.


Secondly, I see you have both directfb and X11:

BR2_PACKAGE_DIRECTFB=y
BR2_PACKAGE_DIRECTFB_TRACE=y
BR2_PACKAGE_DIRECTFB_XSERVER=y
BR2_PACKAGE_XORG7=y
BR2_PACKAGE_XSERVER_XORG_SERVER=y

You can most likely drop directfb. SDL is also relatively big. You also
have a number of unneeded X libraries.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Zoran Djordjevic]

Thank you Peter for your fast answer. Regarding X11, I tried and
didn't succeed with modular XOrg- so decide to try (successfuly)
TinyX. Then I think I should remove?(or comment) lines:
?
BR2_PACKAGE_XORG7=y
BR2_PACKAGE_XSERVER_XORG_SERVER=y
?
Am I right? And also,?in that case (directFB),?is it OK to?remove 
SDL ?
?
Regards
 

________________________________
 From: Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@uclibc.org>
To: Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> 
Cc: "buildroot at busybox.net" <buildroot@busybox.net> 
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: big root fs
  
>>>>> "Zoran" == Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> writes:

Zoran> Hello

Zoran> I built linux kernel using Buildroot, but included glibc support
Zoran> instead of uClibc. For that matter I was using Crosstool NG.
Zoran> I achieved the goal - compiled the GTK applications and they
Zoran> work on my target ARM board. All of that is by using NFS on my
Zoran> Ubuntu machine.? However the size of generated jffs2 is 52MB-
Zoran> which is huge for me.? Although I included GTK examples, and
Zoran> maybe few more properties I still wander if the size is related
Zoran> (only) to glibc matter.? I will try building with uClibc (only
Zoran> to detect difference in size), but at the moment it is important
Zoran> to me to use glibc, so what else can contribute to overal size
Zoran> of image, other than (maybe) glibc.? I attatched my .config if
Zoran> someone want to look at it and maybe find some memory eating
Zoran> matter. Also, can size of glibc be reduced, by throwing out some
Zoran> properties.

First of all, a defconfig file (which you create by running 'make
savedefconfig')? is quite a bit easier to read than the very verbose
.config.


Secondly, I see you have both directfb and X11:

BR2_PACKAGE_DIRECTFB=y
BR2_PACKAGE_DIRECTFB_TRACE=y
BR2_PACKAGE_DIRECTFB_XSERVER=y
BR2_PACKAGE_XORG7=y
BR2_PACKAGE_XSERVER_XORG_SERVER=y

You can most likely drop directfb. SDL is also relatively big. You also
have a number of unneeded X libraries.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120911/95d7e943/attachment.html>

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Le Tue, 11 Sep 2012 05:29:52 -0700 (PDT),
Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :

> I built linux kernel using Buildroot, but included glibc support
> instead of uClibc. For that matter I was using Crosstool NG. 
> I achieved the goal - compiled the GTK?applications and they work on
> my target ARM board. All of that is?by using?NFS on my Ubuntu machine.
> However the size of generated jffs2 is 52MB- which is huge for me.
> Although I included GTK examples, and maybe few more properties I
> still wander if the size is related (only)?to glibc matter. 
> I will try building with uClibc (only to detect difference in size),
> but at the moment it is important to me to use glibc, so what else
> can contribute to overal size of image, other than??(maybe) glibc. 

The difference is size will not be that huge, maybe around 1-2 MB, not
much more.

> I attatched my .config if someone want to look at it and maybe find
> some memory eating matter. Also,?can size of glibc be reduced, by
> throwing out some properties.

glibc does not offer any configuration options. eglibc has a few
options, but that are not exposed by Crosstool-NG, and I doubt that
they provide a really significant size reduction.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Zoran Djordjevic]

So, as much as I understood, I can't expect to reduce jffs2 below
let's say 45MB having included?options that?I stated (GTK, ...).
Then a question emerged to me - how it happens that for example
Qtopia for my ARM board has 25MB, alltogether with some 
video materials, games, ...?
Although I didn't try, but there is Angstrom root file system for my
ARM board, based on glibc, that is 25MB at size, which is considerably 
smaller then my jffs2.
How did they achieve that, or maybe I made some mistakes so the
file size is large ?
?
Regards
 

________________________________
 From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> 
Cc: "buildroot at busybox.net" <buildroot@busybox.net> 
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] big root fs
  
Le Tue, 11 Sep 2012 05:29:52 -0700 (PDT),
Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :

> I built linux kernel using Buildroot, but included glibc support
> instead of uClibc. For that matter I was using Crosstool NG. 
> I achieved the goal - compiled the GTK?applications and they work on
> my target ARM board. All of that is?by using?NFS on my Ubuntu machine.
> However the size of generated jffs2 is 52MB- which is huge for me.
> Although I included GTK examples, and maybe few more properties I
> still wander if the size is related (only)?to glibc matter. 
> I will try building with uClibc (only to detect difference in size),
> but at the moment it is important to me to use glibc, so what else
> can contribute to overal size of image, other than??(maybe) glibc. 

The difference is size will not be that huge, maybe around 1-2 MB, not
much more.

> I attatched my .config if someone want to look at it and maybe find
> some memory eating matter. Also,?can size of glibc be reduced, by
> throwing out some properties.

glibc does not offer any configuration options. eglibc has a few
options, but that are not exposed by Crosstool-NG, and I doubt that
they provide a really significant size reduction.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120911/b43cac7f/attachment-0001.html>

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Avery Pennarun]

The best thing to do is to just poke around the image with du.  You
will probably find tons of files you don't need, especially if you
compare the list of files in your overly-large image vs. the nice
small one.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So, as much as I understood, I can't expect to reduce jffs2 below
> let's say 45MB having included options that I stated (GTK, ...).
> Then a question emerged to me - how it happens that for example
> Qtopia for my ARM board has 25MB, alltogether with some
> video materials, games, ...?
> Although I didn't try, but there is Angstrom root file system for my
> ARM board, based on glibc, that is 25MB at size, which is considerably
> smaller then my jffs2.
> How did they achieve that, or maybe I made some mistakes so the
> file size is large ?
>
> Regards
> From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
>
> To: Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com>
> Cc: "buildroot at busybox.net" <buildroot@busybox.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 3:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [Buildroot] big root fs
>
> Le Tue, 11 Sep 2012 05:29:52 -0700 (PDT),
> Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :
>
>> I built linux kernel using Buildroot, but included glibc support
>> instead of uClibc. For that matter I was using Crosstool NG.
>> I achieved the goal - compiled the GTK applications and they work on
>> my target ARM board. All of that is by using NFS on my Ubuntu machine.
>> However the size of generated jffs2 is 52MB- which is huge for me.
>> Although I included GTK examples, and maybe few more properties I
>> still wander if the size is related (only) to glibc matter.
>> I will try building with uClibc (only to detect difference in size),
>> but at the moment it is important to me to use glibc, so what else
>> can contribute to overal size of image, other than  (maybe) glibc.
>
> The difference is size will not be that huge, maybe around 1-2 MB, not
> much more.
>
>> I attatched my .config if someone want to look at it and maybe find
>> some memory eating matter. Also, can size of glibc be reduced, by
>> throwing out some properties.
>
> glibc does not offer any configuration options. eglibc has a few
> options, but that are not exposed by Crosstool-NG, and I doubt that
> they provide a really significant size reduction.
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
> Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
> development, consulting, training and support.
> http://free-electrons.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Le Tue, 11 Sep 2012 22:32:58 -0700 (PDT),
Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :

> So, as much as I understood, I can't expect to reduce jffs2 below
> let's say 45MB having included?options that?I stated (GTK, ...).
> Then a question emerged to me - how it happens that for example
> Qtopia for my ARM board has 25MB, alltogether with some 
> video materials, games, ...?
> Although I didn't try, but there is Angstrom root file system for my
> ARM board, based on glibc, that is 25MB at size, which is considerably 
> smaller then my jffs2.
> How did they achieve that, or maybe I made some mistakes so the
> file size is large ?

As Avery said, look around with du and ls in your filesystem to check
where the size is, and whether or not the biggest things are actually
useful or not.

Alternatively, could you put online a tarball version of your
filesystem, so that others could help you pointing what are the
problems?

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Zoran Djordjevic]

By the way, what is your opinion?about putting root FS on SD 
card. Does it slow the system down, or have some other 
missadvantages, other then pulling the card out accidentally?
?
Regards
 

________________________________
 From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> 
Cc: "buildroot at busybox.net" <buildroot@busybox.net> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] big root fs
  
Le Tue, 11 Sep 2012 22:32:58 -0700 (PDT),
Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :

> So, as much as I understood, I can't expect to reduce jffs2 below
> let's say 45MB having included?options that?I stated (GTK, ...).
> Then a question emerged to me - how it happens that for example
> Qtopia for my ARM board has 25MB, alltogether with some 
> video materials, games, ...?
> Although I didn't try, but there is Angstrom root file system for my
> ARM board, based on glibc, that is 25MB at size, which is considerably 
> smaller then my jffs2.
> How did they achieve that, or maybe I made some mistakes so the
> file size is large ?

As Avery said, look around with du and ls in your filesystem to check
where the size is, and whether or not the biggest things are actually
useful or not.

Alternatively, could you put online a tarball version of your
filesystem, so that others could help you pointing what are the
problems?

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120912/140e240b/attachment-0001.html>

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Zoran Djordjevic]

It is hard to send output/target folder, because it is about 100MB uncompressed.
Maybe someone will have suggestion, according to next size info:
The biggest folder inside "target" is /lib(20MB) and? /usr - 86MB (/usr/lib -20MB ; /usr/share - 60).
Inside /usr/share - the most parts go to folders: locale (35MB); 

fonts(20MB) and X11(5MB).
I can send some of them although I am aware that info I provided is not so clear.


Regards




________________________________
 From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> 
Cc: "buildroot at busybox.net" <buildroot@busybox.net> 
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 11:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] big root fs
 
Le Tue, 11 Sep 2012 22:32:58 -0700 (PDT),
Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :

> So, as much as I understood, I can't expect to reduce jffs2 below
> let's say 45MB having included?options that?I stated (GTK, ...).
> Then a question emerged to me - how it happens that for example
> Qtopia for my ARM board has 25MB, alltogether with some 
> video materials, games, ...?
> Although I didn't try, but there is Angstrom root file system for my
> ARM board, based on glibc, that is 25MB at size, which is considerably 
> smaller then my jffs2.
> How did they achieve that, or maybe I made some mistakes so the
> file size is large ?

As Avery said, look around with du and ls in your filesystem to check
where the size is, and whether or not the biggest things are actually
useful or not.

Alternatively, could you put online a tarball version of your
filesystem, so that others could help you pointing what are the
problems?

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120912/a0f0206b/attachment-0001.html>

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Le Wed, 12 Sep 2012 01:21:03 -0700 (PDT),
Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :

> It is hard to send output/target folder, because it is about 100MB uncompressed.
> Maybe someone will have suggestion, according to next size info:
> The biggest folder inside "target" is /lib(20MB) and? /usr - 86MB (/usr/lib -20MB ; /usr/share - 60).
> Inside /usr/share - the most parts go to folders: locale (35MB); 

Enable option BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_PURGE. And you can probably set
BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_WHITELIST to just "C en_US". This should get rid of
most of your usr/share/locale directory.

I'm wondering whether we should make BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_PURGE=y and
BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_WHITELIST="C en_US" the defaults.

> fonts(20MB) and X11(5MB).
> I can send some of them although I am aware that info I provided is not so clear.

Can you send the output of:

	cd output/target/
	ls -lRS

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 09/12/12 10:27, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Le Wed, 12 Sep 2012 01:21:03 -0700 (PDT),
> Zoran Djordjevic<djdjdjole@yahoo.com>  a ?crit :
>
>> It is hard to send output/target folder, because it is about 100MB uncompressed.
>> Maybe someone will have suggestion, according to next size info:
>> The biggest folder inside "target" is /lib(20MB) and  /usr - 86MB (/usr/lib -20MB ; /usr/share - 60).
>> Inside /usr/share - the most parts go to folders: locale (35MB);
  The large /lib is indicative of a linux kernel config with too many modules.
Probably because you use a defconfig.  Do:
  make linux-menuconfig
and get rid of the modules you don't need.
Then, change your buildroot configuration to use a custom config instead of
a defconfig, and do
  make linux-update-defconfig
to save the custom config.

  Don't forget to wipe output/target/lib/modules before rebuilding,
or the old modules will just stay there...

> Enable option BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_PURGE. And you can probably set
> BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_WHITELIST to just "C en_US". This should get rid of
> most of your usr/share/locale directory.
>
> I'm wondering whether we should make BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_PURGE=y and
> BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_WHITELIST="C en_US" the defaults.

  Yes!

>> fonts(20MB) and X11(5MB).
  fonts seems a bit on the large side.  Check which font packages you have
selected.
>> I can send some of them although I am aware that info I provided is not so clear.
> Can you send the output of:
>
> 	cd output/target/
> 	ls -lRS
  Make that ls -lRSh (so we get size in MB instead of bytes).


  Regards,
  Arnout

-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                               arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect                 +32-16-286540
Essensium/Mind                                     http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium                BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F

[Buildroot] big root fs

[Zoran Djordjevic]

Your mail server reports me some problems, that is not so much understandable 

to me, so I decided to post attachment in compressed version while repeating text?
once more:

Here is report from my output/target root file system, and as 
Mr Arnout proposed, I added "h" option, along with others.
I just want to say that there is some example programs, I built
for testing in /root folder, but I didn't take that into account,
when I reported overall RFS size. So size is about 100MB, 
as I stated earlier, without /root size.

Regards




________________________________
 From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> 
Cc: "buildroot at busybox.net" <buildroot@busybox.net> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] big root fs
 
Le Wed, 12 Sep 2012 01:21:03 -0700 (PDT),
Zoran Djordjevic <djdjdjole@yahoo.com> a ?crit :

> It is hard to send output/target folder, because it is about 100MB uncompressed.
> Maybe someone will have suggestion, according to next size info:
> The biggest folder inside "target" is /lib(20MB) and? /usr - 86MB (/usr/lib -20MB ; /usr/share - 60).
> Inside /usr/share - the most parts go to folders: locale (35MB); 

Enable option BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_PURGE. And you can probably set
BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_WHITELIST to just "C en_US". This should get rid of
most of your usr/share/locale directory.

I'm wondering whether we should make BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_PURGE=y and
BR2_ENABLE_LOCALE_WHITELIST="C en_US" the defaults.

> fonts(20MB) and X11(5MB).
> I can send some of them although I am aware that info I provided is not so clear.

Can you send the output of:

??? cd output/target/
??? ls -lRS

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120912/97004fdb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: RFSlisting.zip
Type: application/zip
Size: 35078 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120912/97004fdb/attachment-0001.zip>