From: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
To: <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: static busybox?
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:01:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50183986.1030203@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEsOVNeJxw0VbwPX+90riJeVzTQYLdR7dCp==TiCj+eCe=eExw@mail.gmail.com>
On 7/31/12 2:36 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Stuart Yoder <b08248@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We are doing some work with LXC (containers) and one of the templates
>> is for busybox. For LXC, the busybox package needs to be built statically and
>> there is a config option for this.
>>
>> A couple possible approaches:
>>
>> -create a new 'busybox_static' recipe that the lxc package
>> depends on that turns on the needed build options. Pretty
>> straightforward, but now there are 2 variants of the busybox
>> package.
>
> This would seem to work OK with RDEPENDS += "busybox-static" and just
> adding the extra static bits for for the static version. It seems OK
> except we would/could start to get lots of recipes like this.
>
>> -somehow propagate some configuration options through to
>> the standard busybox recipe so it turns on the config
>> option to build things statically. Not sure how to
>> do this, and seems like it could get pretty messy.
>
> Are there any mechanism that currently exist for this? We could turn
> on a DISTRO_FEATURE if we knew we were going use lxc, but that's more
> involved than just adding the lxc recipe and getting the right stuff
> in the root file system.
Kernel config fragment mechanism is there and IMHO works well for something like
this, assuming configuration is using standard
FOO = value
# FOO is not set
kernel semantics....
> Does anyone else have any thoughts on the best approach here?
In this case, I don't think it's a distro feature, it's really a package
configuration option -- the assumption is the rest of the system isn't
statically linked. (Our case was that we wanted a static busybox for an initrd...)
> -M
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-31 20:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-31 18:14 static busybox? Stuart Yoder
2012-07-31 19:36 ` McClintock Matthew-B29882
2012-07-31 20:01 ` Mark Hatle [this message]
2012-08-01 16:48 ` Darren Hart
2012-07-31 19:59 ` Mark Hatle
2012-07-31 20:02 ` Jack Mitchell
2012-07-31 20:07 ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-08-01 16:21 ` Stuart Yoder
2012-08-01 16:36 ` Mark Hatle
2012-08-01 16:49 ` Darren Hart
2012-08-01 16:52 ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-08-01 18:59 ` McClintock Matthew-B29882
2012-08-01 19:05 ` Mark Hatle
2012-08-01 20:05 ` Otavio Salvador
2012-08-02 22:50 ` Stuart Yoder
2012-08-03 10:20 ` Koen Kooi
2012-08-03 11:19 ` Otavio Salvador
2012-08-03 15:30 ` Mark Hatle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50183986.1030203@windriver.com \
--to=mark.hatle@windriver.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox