From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SfwCu-0005tC-KZ for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 18:50:40 +0200 Received: from azsmga002.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.35]) by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jun 2012 09:39:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="112853082" Received: from unknown (HELO envy.home) ([10.255.12.121]) by AZSMGA002.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jun 2012 09:39:59 -0700 Message-ID: <4FDCB690.8090004@linux.intel.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 09:38:40 -0700 From: Darren Hart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120605 Thunderbird/13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Phil Blundell References: <5f472764f7cea2d386b7ee572870fc03769868fc.1339799869.git.dvhart@linux.intel.com> <4FDBBD8D.1050201@linux.intel.com> <1339863500.3339.150.camel@x121e.pbcl.net> In-Reply-To: <1339863500.3339.150.camel@x121e.pbcl.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] busybox: Include setsid and cttyhack in defconfig X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:50:40 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 06/16/2012 09:18 AM, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 15:56 -0700, Darren Hart wrote: >> So the delta for including SETSID and CTTYHACK is 2560 bytes. > > Personally I am still not in favour of adding this to the default > configuration. I appreciate that it's "only" 2.5k in this case, but > every time we make a change like this the binary gets a little bit > bigger and, over time, it does add up. This sort of gradual bloat is > quite insidious and difficult to combat after the fact. > > So, I continue to think that poky-tiny should just provide its own > busybox configuration and turn on the options that it wants just like > other DISTROs do. No doubt there are some things currently included in > the oe-core defaults that poky-tiny doesn't need, so you would probably > get a smaller binary that way as well. You are correct that poky-tiny would benefit from a smaller config. My original intent was to update the busybox recipe to use the new merge-config.sh that we pushed to the upstream Linux kernel (which should work with busybox as it uses the same config mechanism). This would allow us to maintain a base busybox config with a several config fragments that can be easily added via DISTRO_FEATURES rather than the complicated hack that is in busybox now for handling DISTRO_FEATURES. I prefer this approach as it reduces (if not eliminates) the need for the proliferation of busybox.bbappend files. However, this is a larger project and my immediate goal is to get poky-tiny into better shape in terms of the initial experience. This is why I originally implemented it as a "tiny" DISTRO_FEATURE as that would migrate naturally to the config fragment approach. You and others objected to that approach, and I do understand not wanting to complicate the DISTRO_FEATURE logic further. With the above goal in mind, can you accept either of my proposed patches as an interim solution? Either as an added tiny DISTRO_FEATURE or as a simple addition to the defconfig? I do believe these two features are useful beyond poky-tiny. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel