From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 21:44:10 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Question about adding toybox.mk. In-Reply-To: <5410CCD9.60403@landley.net> References: <5410CCD9.60403@landley.net> Message-ID: <5418930A.6080009@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 09/11/14 00:12, Rob Landley wrote: > My toybox project (http://landley.net/toybox) is another multicall > binary posix command line implementation in the same genre as busybox. > (Toybox is public domain instead of GPL and I think the code's a lot > better, but I would, wouldn't I?) Point is, it potentially replaces a > bunch of other packages. > > Various people have added it to buildroot, the first google hit is: > > https://gfiber.googlesource.com/buildroot/+/968ebdd190e2aa15357f44e388c9896fbc8f9ca3/package/toybox/toybox.mk > > So I was thinking of formally submitting a toybox.mk to you guys > upstream, but I've hit a snag: > > Busybox is kind of deeply embedded into buildroot, with 227 lines of > busybox.mk covering a bunch of config symbols and special cases for > selectively hiding and otherwise interacting with lots of other > packages, and it's not just that one file: > > $ grep -irl busybox buildroot/ | wc -l > 89 > > Swapping out busybox for toybox seems about as intrusive as swapping out > uClibc for musl. Does anyone have any hints how I should go about it > before I start? (Having buildroot's toybox.mk define BLAH_BUSYBOX symbol > names, seems... untidy?) The reason that busybox appears in so many other packages is just to make sure that the executables from the full package override the ones from busybox. However, in a first step, it's OK to assume that the full package is not selected when you configure some feature of toybox. We can later correct it if necessary. Regards, Arnout > > Suggestions? > > Rob > > (Yeah, I could wait until toybox's 1.0 release when I've run out of > things that busybox does that toybox doesn't which I care about. But > other people aren't waiting, so I thought I'd look into it. what's there > is _useful_. My aboriginal linux project is slowly replacing busybox > with toybox a command at a time, using them side by side in the > meantime. The real issue here is buildroot is treating busybox as > special when there may actually be 3 or 4 interesting alternate > implementations of the same functionality. Has systemd implemented its > own "mount" and "umount" commands yet? Wait for it...) > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot at busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot > -- Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 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