[OE-core] [PATCH v2 0/1] busybox: update to 1.19.3

[Anders Darander]

* Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com> [111129 09:14]:
> On 11/28/2011 11:04 PM, Anders Darander wrote:
> > * Saul Wold<sgw at linux.intel.com>  [111129 06:47]:
> >> On 11/23/2011 12:59 AM, Anders Darander wrote:
> >>> * Saul Wold<sgw at linux.intel.com>   [111122 21:36]:
> >>>> On 11/22/2011 06:34 AM, Anders Darander wrote:
> >>>>> This updates busybox to the latest stable, 1.19.3.

> >>>>> Among other things, there should be rudimentary support in syslogd for
> >>>>> systemd, by enabling CONFIG_FEATURE_SYSTEMD.

> >>>> How much size does this add to busybox by having it enabled by default?

> >>> Enabling FEATURE_SYSTEMD in busybox costs 192 bytes in my tests in
> >>> qemux86.

> >>>> Is it possible to conditional add a config fragment if systemd is
> >>>> enabled ad the DISTRO/IMAGE_FEATURE level?

> >>>> More info is required.

> > Any more comment on this one? Otavio replied earlier that if it was a
> > small cost, he would prefer to have it on by default. Otherwise, any
> > suggestions for DISTRO/IMAGE_FEATURE?

> Sorry for not being clear on this on, yes to the SYSTEMD change, it's 
> small enough and something we are considering. As Phil points out in the 
> follow-up to this, most are using custom defconfig's that we should just 
> go ahead and enable this for future flexibility.

Thanks!

As we're running systemd, I'm one of those in favour of getting systemd
into oe-core, at least now that is hopefully is getting slightly more
stable.

And yes, just as Phil points out, we're also running custom defconfigs.

> >>>>> Changes:
> >>>>> v2: * Checked the new defconfig (removed settings implying CFLAGS and
> >>>>>        ARCH). The new defconfig should be as close as possible to the old one,
> >>>>>        with the exception of some new utils/options.
> >>>> Can you clearly enumerate what new utils and options and what their size
> >>>> impact on the busybox image is.


> >>> FGCONSOLE, print active console number, 128 bytes

> >>> FEATURE_LOADFONT_PSF2, FEATURE_LOADFONT_RAW, cost 576 bytes

> >> Seems resonable, but why did we not need this before, what changed?

> > Not really sure what the change is (normally I'm only working on
> > headless systems, thus no need for fonts). The two FEATURE_LOADFONT_*
> > options were not available in the old defconfig. I'll leave these two in
> > v3, as you thought the seemd reasonable.

> For minimal, it's good to assume headless, then we should not need the 
> LOADFONT. I thought it was needed for headless as well.

Well, there is a risk of getting a few warning when booting, at least if
you also disable CONFIG_LOADFONT, unless you look through the boot
process. (We're running our system without CONFIG_LOADFONT, hence the
other LOADFONT-options becomes moot).

Cheers,
Anders

-- 
Anders Darander
ChargeStorm AB / eStorm AB