[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: BeastieBox, a (Net)BSD BusyBox-like
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008, iMil wrote:
Agree, but what about executables like sh(1) or ex(1)/vi(1) and probably
others having "huge" non-reductible dependencies (ncurses, libedit...) ?
(note this is a real question, better said: "what would you suggest ?"). For
these two, as an example, I ported NetBSD 0.9 sh(1) and 2.11BSD ex(1) that
only depends on libterm.
Well, there is always /bin/ed for a small editor (45K on i386 5.0)
As mentionned in my very first announce, this is/was a for-fun project, now
if there's a need for something similar in NetBSD's base, I'd be glad to drop
bbox's ball to concentrate on something having a meaning for the NetBSD
I think your best result might be improving -DSMALL for some of
the binaries from rescue, but for a few pulling in other sources.
Of course any -DSMALL work helps almost everyone using NetBSD
in embedded work and even people trying to fit install binaries
on small media or memory systems :)
And btw :
~$ du -sh /rescue
That seems very high - are you sure you don't have an old binary
from something lying around there - my i386 5.0 system reports
4.4M (Not that that is tiny, but...)
What does "du -shc /rescue/*" report?
David/absolute -- www.NetBSD.org: No hype required --
Main Index |
Thread Index |