On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:59:42PM +0000, Burton, Ross wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 23:55, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > My current incomplete list is: > > bind-utils \ > > bridge-utils \ > > coreutils \ > > dnsmasq \ > > e2fsprogs \ > > e2fsprogs-resize2fs \ > > e2fsprogs-tune2fs \ > > findutils \ > > gawk \ > > grep \ > > inetutils-ping \ > > inetutils-ping6 \ > > inetutils-traceroute \ > > iproute2 \ > > less \ > > net-tools \ > > parted \ > > pciutils \ > > procps \ > > sed \ > > util-linux \ > > vim \ > > which \ > > > > And it's also incomplete as there's more stuff under inetutils I don't > > need (but others may), and I set aside patch/diff/ed and some other > > stuff I don't need. And since some of that stuff comes from > > meta-openembedded, it's indeed really not clear how/where a packagegroup > > would reside as we need things out of meta-networking. > > That's a good start. For a oe-core packagegroup
I do not think a core-only packagegroup makes sense when the goal is to completely replace busybox (and not just most apps while keeping a few busybox apps installed). > I'd suggest dropping > dnsmasq bridgeutils bindutils to keep it lean. The stated usecases are not "lean" but "replace all busybox commands with the full versions". For that you need bind-utils (in oe-core) for DNS lookup. >... > Also swap vim for something in core obviously. It is not obvious how to do that. What other vi implementation is in core? Is there even any good non-busybox non-GUI editor in core? Replacing busybox vi with ed would be a bad fit for the stated usecases. There has to be some vi implementation installed, and the "desktop command" implementation is vim. > Ross cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto