Re: installing rump libs

[Antti Kantee <pooka%cs.hut.fi@localhost>]

On Sun Jul 27 2008 at 23:51:16 -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 08:46:28PM +0300, Antti Kantee wrote:
> >
> > * use of the kernel file system code in various utilities such as
> >   fsck and makefs instead of having to rewrite the same code for
> >   userspace
> 
> This is a worthy goal, but installing all of puffs and rump is going to
> break the camel's back on a lot of small embedded systems; and if it's
> intended that MKPUFFS go away, that increases build time, too.  Will it
> still be possible to have working newfs and fsck without building puffs
> and rump?

That is a valid concern.  I am not going to start converting working
code right away just for fun.  And I think the technology needs to settle
before considering replacing critical parts of the infrastructure.

But like I wrote in another part of the email: you still need the code
for the kernel and maybe you can reuse the same binary code.  You'd still
need librump, but maybe the kernel can be rearchitectured so that you
don't need so much of it.  Anyway, this is a wild handwavy vision part.
For offline tools such as makefs the size concern doesn't really apply.

rump is independent of puffs, so the concern about puffs is not valid
here:
http://www.netbsd.org/docs/puffs/rump.html#components

  - antti