On 12/04/13 02:12, richardvo...@gmail.com wrote:
All of this suggests that to minimize the number of combinations but
not bloat the binary, there ought to be a `MINIMAL` or `TEENY_TINY`
macro that unsets HAVE_IPSET and a bunch of other similar non-critical
features.
But which ones? The minimal
All of this suggests that to minimize the number of combinations but
not bloat the binary, there ought to be a `MINIMAL` or `TEENY_TINY`
macro that unsets HAVE_IPSET and a bunch of other similar non-critical
features.
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
On 21/03/13 17:41, Vladislav Grishenko wrote:
Hi Simon,
Here’s output from bloat-o-meter (busybox’s one) after enabling
HAVE_IPSET on mips32 platform
The growth is ~2Kb, I guess it’s ok to have it enabled by default for
bb, but please, insist on not to drop HAVE_IPSET define.
At least, not
On 21/03/13 11:23, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant wrote:
Hi Simon,
I'll express an opinion, based purely on my *very* limited experience of
integrating 2.66test16 into a recent version of Tomato to fix some IPv6
problems. I keen an eye on latest git pushes and integrate those into
my own personal
On 20/03/13 17:31, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
Hi Simon,
It's just occurred to me that no router developer is going to know to
turn HAVE_IPSET on, and hence, it won't be available immediately on any
devices, which is a bummer. Further, unless the --ipset= options are
used, HAVE_IPSET doesn't
On 21/03/2013 10:08, Simon Kelley wrote:
snip
Finally, if it's going to be on by default, and given the limited size
delta/lack of library definitions, there's an argument for not making
it compile-time selectable at all. Every compile-time switch
contributes to the combinatorial explosion
-Original Message-
From: dnsmasq-discuss-boun...@lists.thekelleys.org.uk [mailto:dnsmasq-
discuss-boun...@lists.thekelleys.org.uk] On Behalf Of Simon Kelley
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 4:08 PM
To: dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Enable HAVE_IPSET
Hi all,
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Vladislav Grishenko wrote:
Just my 2 cents, binary size is important on devices with very limited flash
size (2Mb, 4Mb).
It depends how much size. If it's less than 4Kb when compiled with -Os
then I'd say it's pretty irrelevant.
Without knowing how much it
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Simon Kelley wrote:
Not specifically in reply to this, but some data.
i386, gcc -O2, not stripped, dnsmasq-2.66test23
without -DHAVE_IPSETbinary is 241943 bytes
with -DHAVE_IPSET binary is 244177 bytes
so the difference is about 1%
Happily, that's still the
On 21/03/13 12:10, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Simon Kelley wrote:
Not specifically in reply to this, but some data.
i386, gcc -O2, not stripped, dnsmasq-2.66test23
without -DHAVE_IPSETbinary is 241943 bytes
with -DHAVE_IPSET binary is 244177 bytes
so the difference
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Simon Kelley si...@thekelleys.org.ukwrote:
On 21/03/13 12:10, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Simon Kelley wrote:
Not specifically in reply to this, but some data.
i386, gcc -O2, not stripped, dnsmasq-2.66test23
without -DHAVE_IPSETbinary
On 21/03/13 15:05, sven falempin wrote:
DNSMASQ also run on system like FreeBSD, do not assume a linux kernel -_-
you could also have a cygwin port one day.
You want IPSET ? you turn it on.
Imagine if everyone want his very own favorite feature set by default !
That's true, but not
-
discuss-boun...@lists.thekelleys.org.uk] On Behalf Of Simon Kelley
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 9:09 PM
To: dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Enable HAVE_IPSET by default
On 21/03/13 15:05, sven falempin wrote:
DNSMASQ also run on system like
Hi Simon,
It's just occurred to me that no router developer is going to know to
turn HAVE_IPSET on, and hence, it won't be available immediately on any
devices, which is a bummer. Further, unless the --ipset= options are
used, HAVE_IPSET doesn't contribute at _all_ to the runtime of the app. And
14 matches
Mail list logo
