On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koski...@iki.fi> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:25:04PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > I wonder about the use case for this feature? I mean busybox is meant for > > small systems in general, and >=64 cores are not that small embedded > > systems, at least not yet, yeah? > > How you define small? Earlier you said using libc getconf is bloat > (as nproc replacement) for multicore systems, but now you suggest > that for cores > 64 we should't care. Where do you draw the line? > > Embedded systems that have lots of RAM and CPUs/cores run-time may be > still limited to having a boot flash of just few megs where the whole > OS image needs to fit. > Show me one typical embedded system that is high-volume and has more than 64 cores. Even the full-fledged iphone tablets are not there and even if they were, they would use complete utils rather than chopped most probably anyhow. To me, this feature does not seem to fit busybox's goal unless Apple, Samsung, etc were not notified about some recent boom in the semiconductor industry.
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
