> > Also, I'd prefer to make a system flexible enough to handle:
> >
> > Base utilities...choice of:
> > "Standard" binary
> > BusyBox
> > asmutils
> > shell-script (POSIXness or similar)
> > omitted entirely
> >
> > Libraries...choice of:
> > ulibc
> > glibc (various versions)
> > newlib
> > others?
>
> ...dietlibc...
>
> What is the goal in doing all this? Isn't this wide latitude of
> variation what is causing all the grief in the glibc versions? Trying
> to compile something written for glibc 2.2 against glibc 2.0 can be
> downright annoying...
I guess I'm thinking of a base system that uses one of the small c
libraries, with the option of adding something like glibc 2.2 if you've got
the space and are running something that requires it (maybe bind, a web
server, or something similar). I'd mainly like to see enough checking in
the install/packaging scripts so users would at least be prompted to install
missing packages (like the glibc 2.2 library) rather than just getting a
non-functional system.
> > The other thing I'd like to see is an enhanced packaging system
> > of some sort, that can handle a variety of boot and storage media...from
the
> > current floppy boot into a ramdisk, to CD or HDD boot into a hybrid
system
> > with volitle (ram-disk), non-volitle (flash/HDD), and read-only
> > (CD-ROM/boot-ROM).
>
> You lost me there. A package system has no concept of "boot" or
> "media", only of files and compiles and makes and things like
> /bin/sh...
To me, the package system for something like LRP has very different
requirements than those RPM and DEB were created to meet. Both RPM and DEB
package systems assume they are working with a system that has lots of
non-volitle storage space (ie a large HDD), and AFAIK have little or no
provision for backing up the packages (or at least the modified config
files) so you can re-build the system exactly the same on the next boot,
once your volitle memory has gone away. If you know of tools that can
backup modified files from an RPM or DEB install, please point me to them.
> There are several packaging formats that are interesting:
>
> * RPM - unrpm (busybox)
> * Deb - undeb (busybox)
>
> ...and something else to consider:
>
> * Portage - this is used by Gentoo, and basically brings a form of the
> FreeBSD ports tree to Linux. The concept is this: you change into a
> directory, perform a "build", then the system fetches the source file
> and compiles it for your environment. This has the benefit of
> compiling the code for *YOUR* environment rather than relying on a
> central packaging authority which may or may not run the same things
> that you do.
I took a look at the Gentoo site, and I like what they're doing. Portage
might be useful as a big chunk of the compile environment, if it's flexible
enough (likely) and easy enough to setup/install.
Charles Steinkuehler
http://lrp.steinkuehler.net
http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror)
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
