Re: static busybox?

[Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>]

On 8/3/12 6:19 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Stuart Yoder <b08248@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com> wrote:
>>>> On 8/1/12 1:59 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
>>>>> This is one approach, to change busybox completely for a specific
>>>>> added layer. But, what if we only want to make this change to busybox
>>>>> if the lxc recipe is included in the image? What about other packages
>>>>> also requesting changes?
>>>>
>>>> There is no method within OE to change a configuration of one item, if
>>>> another item is included or not.
>>>>
>>>> The way to do this is use the PACKAGECONFIG options, and then pass via a
>>>> per-recipe configuration if you want lxc support enabled or not.. (or
>>>> possible lxc becomes a distro flag?)
>>>
>>> For lxc specific case I think we can just have a recipe that sets the
>>> busybox' static option. It seems to be the only difference we'd have
>>> for it.
>>
>> Do you mean a distinct 'busybox-static' recipe that lxc would
>> depend on?
>
> Yes; it might include the regular busybox recipe and do the need
> appends, or something like that.
>

That would certainly be my recommendation.  Use the same base recipe, same 
configuration mechanism, and then just add the addition chunk(s) to the SRC_URI 
and it should be much easier to maintain long-term.

The only thing remaining, is anyone working on adding the configuration yet? 
(I'd love to, but I'm swamped with work for about the next 2-3 weeks.)

--Mark