<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /></head><body style='font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif'>
<p>On 2017-03-29 08:41, Burton, Ross wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><!-- html ignored --><!-- head ignored --><!-- meta ignored -->
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br />
<div class="gmail_quote">On 28 March 2017 at 23:45, Stefan Agner <span><<a href="mailto:stefan@agner.ch">stefan@agner.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0 0 0 .8ex; border-left: 1px #ccc solid; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div id=":yn" class="a3s aXjCH m15b171ab2ecb0014">@@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ PACKAGES =+ "util-linux-agetty util-linux-fdisk util-linux-cfdisk util-linux-sfd<br /> <span class=""> util-linux-swaponoff util-linux-losetup util-linux-umount \<br /> util-linux-mount util-linux-readprofile util-linux-uuidd \<br /> </span> util-linux-uuidgen util-linux-lscpu util-linux-fsck.cramfs util-linux-fsck \<br /> - util-linux-blkid util-linux-mkfs util-linux-mcookie util-linux-reset \<br /> - util-linux-lsblk util-linux-mkfs.cramfs util-linux-fstrim \<br /> + util-linux-blkdiscard util-linux-blkid util-linux-mkfs util-linux-mcookie \<br /> + util-linux-reset util-linux-lsblk util-linux-mkfs.cramfs util-linux-fstrim \<br /> util-linux-partx util-linux-hwclock util-linux-mountpoint \<br /> util-linux-findfs util-linux-getopt util-linux-sulogin util-linux-prlimit"</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br />We're growing a lot of packages containing a single binary. Would it be sensible to group them into "file system tools", "process tools", etc?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Not sure if such a high level grouping is helpful. Just because an image uses one fs utility, does not mean the others are used too. There might be some potential on a lower level (e.g. <span>util-linux-mkfs.cramfs and <span>util-linux-fsck.cramfs).</span></span></p>
<p>Is having lots of single binary packages an issue? I guess package management data adds some space overhead? In my case, I build a image without package metadata, so I guess there is no overhead for the final image (for the final image).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Best regards,</p>
<p>Stefan</p>
<div> </div>
</body></html>