From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fed1mtao01.cox.net ([68.6.19.244]) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 17Mtyb-0000fn-00 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 18:19:37 +0100 Subject: Re: OpenSSH/OpenSSL is too big... any alternatives? From: Russ Dill To: Gonzalo Servat Cc: Linux MTD mailing list In-Reply-To: <1025014199.2220.3.camel@beamer.servat.com> References: <1025014199.2220.3.camel@beamer.servat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 25 Jun 2002 10:19:03 -0700 Message-Id: <1025025543.2006.30.camel@russ> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 07:09, Gonzalo Servat wrote: > Hi All > > I have a 2MiB DiskOnChip. After installing the kernel, BusyBox, iptables > and a couple of libs from uClibc I only have 400k left of space. > OpenSSH needs to link to OpenSSL and OpenSSL is well over 1MB on it's > own. Is there any alternatives to OpenSSL/OpenSSH that will fit on 400k? I have: uClibc busybox kernel dnrd iptables vtun thttpd utelnetd pppd+pppoe udhcp + a bunch of other things I can't think of it makes a 1.41M image, compile everything with uclibc, strip it properly, and it works out