lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: klibc and what's the next step?
Date
On Wednesday 28 June 2006 8:04 pm, Roman Zippel wrote:
> If you are concerned about this simply keep the whole thing optional.
> Embedded application usually know their boot device and they don't need no
> fancy initramfs.

Actually, a lot of embedded applications like initramfs because it saves
memory (a ram block device, a filesystem driver, and filesystem overhead.)
Don't use embedded applications as a reason _not_ to do this!

BusyBox has had explicit support for initramfs (switch_root) for several
versions now. I pestered HPA about building a subset of BusyBox against
klibc (and cross-compiling klibc for non-x86 platforms) at the Consumer
Electronics Linux Forum, but haven't had time to follow up yet.

Rob
--
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-07-03 20:34    [W:0.140 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site