Back in November I had prototyped something like this and even called it nano. Here's the post I made to the list about it and using then current hwpack + then current headless how I was able to chop things down considerably.
http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2010-November/001439.html There was plenty of low hanging fruit and I was able to get the installed size of the rootfs down to 82M, after installing the hardware pack back then added in another ~40M. I do think the measure of size of the image needs to be the install size, not the download size. For something extra small shouldn't it aim for some power of 2 that could fit into an board flash? 64M/128M installed with hwpack? I like the idea of an image that is small, and boots extremely quickly. For those that would take linaro as a starting base for their projects, this seems like a good starting base. And to build on that concept, add ALIP which should also be small as possible, and boot extremely quickly into a graphical environment that includes a browser. Regards, Tom "We want great men who, when fortune frowns will not be discouraged." - Colonel Henry Knox w) tom.gall att linaro.org w) tom_gall att vnet.ibm.com h) tom_gall att mac.com On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Jamie Bennett <jamie.benn...@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Currently we are reassessing whether or not the Headless image meets > the requirements for a small, fast, useable image for board > verification. Just for information the current stats as of 2011-01-21 > are: > > * Download Size: 64M > * Download size with OMAP3 hwpack: 100M > * Package count: 260 > > The list of package currently on the image can be found at: > > https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/Specs/HeadlessImage#Package List > > The current thoughts are to cut this image down as much as possible > whilst still retaining the ability to boot to a command prompt. The > new image would be a 'nano' image and would be useful for verifying > that the hardware boots. For a more complete console-only image for > developers a full-featured developer image would be created. See my > other email entitled "Call for opinion: Linaro 'Developer' Image" > for that. > > Is anyone *really* against this idea and is satisfied with the > Headless image in its current state? Opinions? Thoughts? Criticisms? > > Regards, > Jamie. > -- > Linaro Release Manager > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-dev mailing list > linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev > _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
