"Erik" == Erik Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Erik On Fri Oct 20, 2000 at 05:02:48PM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
Ok, cool. Do you have a patch queue for us?
Erik My mailbox. I can also give folks write access...
Ok; I'll just email anything I get time for.
"Erik" == Erik Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Erik At Lineo (where I work) we have a tool called "Lipo" (written in perl) that
Erik does the library reduction thing, and we have it working quite nicely on a
Erik number of platforms.
Can we use it?
Erik I don't think
On Fri Oct 20, 2000 at 02:24:59PM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
"Erik" == Erik Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Erik At Lineo (where I work) we have a tool called "Lipo" (written in perl) that
Erik does the library reduction thing, and we have it working quite nicely on a
On Fri Oct 20, 2000 at 05:02:48PM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
Ok, cool. Do you have a patch queue for us?
My mailbox. I can also give folks write access...
Erik The syscall layer is in a state of flux at the moment -- starting late last
Erik night I began converting from asm
On Sun Oct 01, 2000 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
To be honest, I've never been given a really good explanation as to why
libc reduction works in our current setup, period. I spent a while
trying to make it work on powerpc and gave
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 12:38:45PM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
If you would like, I could write up a "General Theory of Library Reduction"
readme, that explains how it works...
If you do, please mail me a copy
Marcin
--
++ The reason we come up with new
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 12:38:45PM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
On Sun Oct 01, 2000 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
To be honest, I've never been given a really good explanation as to why
libc reduction works in our current setup,
Adam Di Carlo writes:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
I think grub would be better since it's xplatform. I have heard
^
rumors that its not ready for prime time yet, though.
[snip]
GRUB is quite nice, however, it is not
On Thu Sep 28, 2000 at 06:36:00PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
I feel that the design discussions have reached the point where we'll be
more productive if we're talking about actual code. There are still many
decisions to be made, but most of them are on the level of how an
individual module
Taketoshi Sano wrote:
* base tarball installer
Is "base tarball" required for woody debian-installer ?
I think if we can use network to retrieve packages, then
we can use the fresh archive itself, rather than old base
part of the archive which was frozen into tar-ball.
Yes, we can
Joey Hess wrote:
* mini dpkg (mostly done)
* base tarball creator (don't have to write, we can just use
boot-floppies to make base tarballs for the first cut)
* mini debconf (with 1 frontend and a basic database)
* main menu generation code
* http retriever
* kernel build (with
On Sat Sep 30, 2000 at 12:51:22AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
Erik Andersen wrote:
Where do we upload things to? Can we get an archive area? I've had busybox
.debs ready for months now...
And I've had bug #66604 open for months too. I need to track down some
of the ftp maintainers and get
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, we can certianly try to do this eventually. However, take a look at
all the disgusting stuff basedisks.sh has to do in the boot-floppies to
create a debian base system. A lot of packages need to be cleaned up
before we can just dpkg -i `cat base-debs`
On Sat Sep 30, 2000 at 01:26:49PM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
I think grub would be better since it's xplatform. I have heard
rumors that its not ready for prime time yet, though.
I've been using it with great results on my laptop, home box, and work box. I
give it two thumbs up (though
On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 09:54:53AM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
It will fit. Oh, yes. It will. ;-)
I'm sure it can be done. Though we may need to switch to libc5 or uclibc or
something more exotic (like the thin syscall wrapper libc thing on the RedHat
installer).
Oooh, uclibc. That's
Erik Andersen wrote:
Maybe we can use it as the actual engine of the retreiver. The
retreivers though have to all use a standard interface, and I think it
makes sense to make a special module for the glue code.
I see. So more then just a retriever, you want something like the current
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Oooh, uclibc. That's a good idea.
In fact, that's a VITAL idea.
Joey, please remember that some architectures (I'm thinking powerpc
here, and at least two more) do not support library reduction. libc on
a floppy is not an option.
I've never been given a good
On Sat Sep 30, 2000 at 06:08:39PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Oooh, uclibc. That's a good idea.
In fact, that's a VITAL idea.
Joey, please remember that some architectures (I'm thinking powerpc
here, and at least two more) do not support library reduction.
I feel that the design discussions have reached the point where we'll be
more productive if we're talking about actual code. There are still many
Please create a picture of the layout/concept/modules. An picture says more
then 1000
Thanks,
Hartmut
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
19 matches
Mail list logo
