Hi! On 30.11.2011 22:34, Michael Conrad wrote: > On 11/30/2011 3:37 PM, Harald Becker wrote: >> IMHO we shall remove that link creation feature of Busybox completely. >> Why can't we have a bb_install script that does this installation. That >> script may not only install the links. The script may even create >> directories, devices and add some necessary (minimalistic) configuration >> files (under /etc). In addition the script may be tailored to create >> Busybox root systems for different purposes (initrd, initramfs, hd boot >> portion, chroot environment, web server cgi environment, etc.). After >> root system creation the script is no longer required and may be removed >> (not to be included in initramfs - will not waste that space in >> minimalistic systems). > > Actually, I use that feature to create a self-extracting initramfs. I > use an init script with "#! /bin/busybox sh" as its interpreter, and > the second line is "/bin/busybox --install". I would think the size > of the routine to create a link for each applet would be less than the > bytes used in a cpio archive to describe ~50 hard links. More > importantly, though, it saves me the trouble of needing to remember > which applets I've removed or added when switching to a new busybox, > and keeps my development-time initramfs file tree easy to work with > and manage with version control.
Busybox has a feature to list all included applets "busybox --list". Taking that one a script may easily create whatever link you like (hardlink, symolic link) at any place you like. That way it is more flexible than including the link creation within the Busybox binary. In addition the install script may be removed from the final file system and doesn't waste space. ... but I don't want to create a war at that topic, as long as the "--install" feature stays optional. It is just my opinion. -- Harald _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
