Issac,
Thanks for your reply. Yes, I am a bit familiar with Linux, been doing
work with it for 10+ years, from kernel hacking old 2.4/2.6 kernels up to
building entire systems (but using 3rd party tools, like. . . Yucto. . . :(
)
No, Init is NOT copied to the RFS, as far as I can tell, the RFS ends up
with /init -> /bin/busybox. . .
I know what taskset does, been doing multi-core stuff for a few years now.
RE: Installing BB - yes, it's a big copy loop, I'll check and research this
in more detail. Again, this is a bit of a furball I inherited. . . (I
see the copies scroll by during the build). I'll create the link to
taskset() in this list.
RE: systemd - well, there's something that needs it, somewhere. I added
that, then got similar error about liblzma.so. I assume systemd is
"outside" the kernel, so no change in kernel configuration is required? So
it's either busy box configuration or some other "stuff" being copied over
getting in the way (oh the joys of upgrading. . .)
Thanks again, your pointers are moving me down the line. Unfortunately, I
got preempted for other work at the moment.
Thanks!
Regards,
Stephen Beckwith
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Isaac Dunham <ibid...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 08:34:00AM -0400, Stephen Beckwith wrote:
> > Isaac,
> > Thank you of your reply. I noticed the reference to taskset() as well,
> > but looking at the code in busy box, the help didn't match. . . Guess I
> > should have checked my host. . . It did match :(
> > So, yep, you were dead on! The build script DID copy the host taskset
> > binary to the RFS. I removed this this copy, but now have a new issue:
> > missing the libsystemd.so library (Guess it's still needed for init,
> even
> > though not using it???)
>
> Make sure you're not copying init to the root filesystem?
>
> Busybox provides some "systemd support" (for running under systemd), but
> does not link against libsystemd as far as I can tell.
>
> But I think the answer to your question may be part of the solution:
> > Question:
> > If I use the busy box version of taskset(), shouldn't I see a link
> > somewhere in /bin or /sbin??? I can't seem to find this link. . . I
> though
> > "all" of the various utilities busy box replaces become links to busy
> box,
> > is this not the case?
>
> First, terminology conventions:
> By convention, "taskset" usually means the taskset command;
> taskset() would be a C function named taskset;
>
> taskset(1) or taskset(8) would be a manpage describing the taskset command,
> where the number in parentheses is the man section,
> or (by extension) the command described in that manpage;
>
> and taskset(2)/taskset(3) would be a manpage describing a C function or
> kernel syscall named taskset in section 2 or 3, or the function or syscall
> it describes.
>
> Second, your question:
> How are you installing Busybox?
> If you are just copying the binary, you need to manually create the links;
> if you are using "make install" and copying, they should be created for
> you.
>
> If I were writing a script to build a RFS from scratch, I'd use this method
> (assuming a static busybox in the current directory, that you want the full
> {usr/,}{s,}bin and that the directories you need are already present):
>
> cp busybox "$ROOT_FS_DIR"/bin/
> cd "$ROOT_FS_DIR"/
>
> # If you want one directory, cd to bin;
> # use busybox --list; and link to "busybox".
>
> for APPLET in `./bin/busybox --list-full`; do
> ln -s /bin/busybox "$APPLET"
> done
>
>
> Then, for copying over files form the root filesystem, make sure you unlink
> the destination before you copy the file.
>
>
> HTH,
> Isaac
>
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
