Matthew Franz wrote: > > Frank, > > I think the OS-builder app is a great idea. > > Would its "raw material" be pre-compiled debian binary packages or would
My first pass at this will be based on snarfing pre-compiled binary packages. Simply Q&D, but probably useful to a lot of people. > it be able to build the system from source. Unless there were separate I think building from source is a valid next step... > embedded .debs, I don't know that the standard binaries would be compact > enough to support limited memory/storage environments. Take busybox. > Based on the build instructions, the app would modify busybox.def.h and > build the binary to contain only the commands/features that were > necessary. In many cases, the standard .debs would probably be fine, but > in some cases you would need more control over the build. One of my thoughts was to have something like a "Use Busybox Whereever Possible" config option. If this is set, then for each utility chosen by the user, if there is a busybox implementation for this utility, use that instead of the 'standard' version. > > An added benefit would be if the "OS-builder" were modular and extensible > enough to not only configure which packages are to used but to configure > the packages themselves. Lets say you were including apache (more likely > boa!), you would be able to specify the initial document root and other > essential variables. Yup! -Frank. > _______________________________________________ > Emdebian-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/emdebian-discuss >