On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 04:42:48PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > * Ben Collins > > | Debian installer using a udeb for libc/libm/libdl/ldso, doesn't make > | much sense to me. Even if we get rid of the backward compatibility, > | you're still looking at over 800k just for libc.so.6, and then 80k for > | ld-linux.so.2. That doesn't even include libm/libdl. > > It makes sense. Trust me. Or go read the thread on -boot after my > latest post to d-d-a. Or talk to me on IRC and I'll try to convince > you. > > | I suspect debian-installer will need to have a dynamic module for when > | an install image is built, based on the symbols it needs, and then use > | mklibs (like boot-floppies does) to get a stripped down libc from > | libc6-pic. > > We do that for the boot image, but one _can't know_ what parts will be > needed later by the udebs installed into the installation image.
So we can make a udeb simply by copying the already built libs at regular .deb creation? If it's that simple, please write up a patch to the glibc build to do this. Please _do not_ ask us to do a special optmized build just for creating udeb's. One build is enough right now. If you want a smaller special build, then I suggest getting uClibc ported :) -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://linux1394.sourceforge.net/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
