Re: static busybox?

[Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>]

On 07/31/2012 01:01 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> 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....

I've been wanting to get the kernel merge-config mechanism available for
busybox for a while. It definitely seems like the right way to go here.
It could also really simplify some of the logic in the busybox recipe.

--
Darren

> 
>> 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
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
> 

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel