Tom Eastep wrote:
> Natanael Copa wrote:
>
>> Have you thought of lua? should give you better performance than perl
>> and would still be small enough for embedded. I can't say I have been
>> looking at the shorewall code, but lua is very table oriented, which
>> might be good for your table based
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 13:22, Eric Spakman wrote:
> We have indeed, but like Kp said it's around 350 kbytes compressed and
> only contains the Perl (micro) interpreter. No Perl modules or any
> other goodies (this would probably the same with the openwrt ipkg).
> Together with a Shorewall interpre
Hi Mike,
>Everyone,
>It looks like there are some embedded distributions that successfully
>built relatively small perl packages. See:
>
>CPAN/Ports
>http://www.cpan.org/ports/
>
>Maybe we can glean useful information from existing binary builds to
>generate our own package.
>
I don't see a lot o
Hi Mike,
>On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 11:11, Tom Eastep wrote:
>> If you find one that looks promising, let me know. I assume that it will
>> be limited in some way but I'm used to programming to "the greatest
>> common denominator".
>
>Tom,
>It looks like OpenWrt and NSLU2-Linux have microperl ipkg bui
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 11:11, Tom Eastep wrote:
> If you find one that looks promising, let me know. I assume that it will
> be limited in some way but I'm used to programming to "the greatest
> common denominator".
Tom,
It looks like OpenWrt and NSLU2-Linux have microperl ipkg builds
available.
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 11:11, Tom Eastep wrote:
> If you find one that looks promising, let me know. I assume that it will
> be limited in some way but I'm used to programming to "the greatest
> common denominator".
Tom,
KP and Eric found the smallest one Microperl. The other one is Miniperl.
I'm n
Am Sonntag, 25. Februar 2007 19:45:53 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> Everyone,
> It looks like we need to see how large a perl package for leaf branches
> is.
344kb for Microperl ( a subset of perl) according to a test package by Eric
Spakman
http://www.leaf-project.org/bering-uclibc/index.php?module=pag
Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 10:45, Mike Noyes wrote:
>> I'm not having much luck finding embedded builds of the perl engine.
>> I'll keep looking.
>
> Everyone,
> It looks like there are some embedded distributions that successfully
> built relatively small perl packages. See:
>
>
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 10:45, Mike Noyes wrote:
> I'm not having much luck finding embedded builds of the perl engine.
> I'll keep looking.
Everyone,
It looks like there are some embedded distributions that successfully
built relatively small perl packages. See:
CPAN/Ports
http://w
Everyone,
It looks like we need to see how large a perl package for leaf branches
is.
I'm not having much luck finding embedded builds of the perl engine.
I'll keep looking.
--
Mike Noyes
http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/
SF.net Projects: leaf, sitedocs
---
Simon Matter wrote:
> My question is whether it's possible to use perl for some kind of
> Shorewall-accelerator. I mean if it would be possible to create a simple
> shell to perl converter which then runs perl instead of the shell and does
> exactly the same, then it could be used whenever perl is
Mike Noyes wrote:
>
>
> I'd worry when distributions start dropping Shorewall. That's an
> indication of decline.
>
Good point.
-Tom
--
Tom Eastep\ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net
Washington USA \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key
Paul G Rogers wrote:
> Tom, there's an ancient expression, "the fox knows many things, the
> hedgehog knows just one thing." I don't prend to understand all the
> complications, but I do understand the internet environment is not
> getting any safer--it's getting more dangerous. To be sure, the c
Natanael Copa wrote:
>
> Have you thought of lua? should give you better performance than perl
> and would still be small enough for embedded. I can't say I have been
> looking at the shorewall code, but lua is very table oriented, which
> might be good for your table based config files.
I suspe
I had hoped to be able to avoid another RC but there have been enough
changes that I've decided that the safe thing to do is to release RC3.
http://www1.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/development/3.4/shorewall-3.4.0-RC3/
ftp://ftp1.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/development/3.4/shorewall-3.4.0-RC3/
Pro
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 16:02, Tom Eastep wrote:
> Activity on the mailing lists and IRC channel has been steadily declining
> for the last couple of years. This signals to me that the rate at which
> people are adopting Shorewall is waning (I grant that the documentation has
> gotten better over th
16 matches
Mail list logo
