From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Swc5U-00085q-9s for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:48:29 +0200 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q71GaGqF001533 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:36:16 -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; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:36:16 -0700 Message-ID: <50195AFF.1070507@windriver.com> Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 11:36:15 -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: <50183924.8010309@windriver.com> 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: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 16:48:29 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/1/12 11:21 AM, Stuart Yoder wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Bruce Ashfield > wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: >>> On 7/31/12 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. >>>> >>>> -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. >>>> >>>> Any thoughts? >>> >>> >>> We've been talking about this as well.. I'm currently of the opinion that >>> the kernel's config fragement processing be added to busybox. This way >>> someone can simply add a configuration fragment via a bbappend, or other >>> approach and it'll pick it up. That same can be used to specify how to >>> enable other optional pieces of busybox. >> >> merge_config.pl can be yanked out of the kernel source tree (it's upstream) and >> packaged as something for use by busy box. >> >> I wouldn't recommend all the scaffolding that the kernel has (it's >> overkill, since >> there are more configs, patches and git manipulations in play for the >> kernel), but a\ >> simple scheme to collect the fragments from the SRC_URI and fire them through >> merge_config.pl would be a pretty simple python routine. > > So how would this work from the user's point of view? I somehow > need to get busybox's CONFIG_STATIC config option set. Does the lxc > recipe somehow > specify this? Or does the lxc recipe reference a busybox-static > dependency that sets the option? You would be able to add a .bbappend that would have a configuration fragment in it. This fragment would be added to the busybox configuration to override any built in items. So you'd need to simply have a file that says: CONFIG_STATIC = y --Mark > Stuart > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >