From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail1.windriver.com ([147.11.146.13]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SwIoD-0003CL-Oa for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 22:12:50 +0200 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q6VK1AvD022845 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:01:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Marks-MacBook-Pro.local (172.25.34.39) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.309.2; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:01:11 -0700 Message-ID: <50183986.1030203@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:01:10 -0500 From: Mark Hatle Organization: Wind River Systems User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: static busybox? 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: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 20:12:50 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 7/31/12 2:36 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Stuart Yoder 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 >