Messages in this thread | | | From | Rob Landley <> | Subject | Re: klibc and what's the next step? | Date | Mon, 3 Jul 2006 14:30:45 -0400 |
| |
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/
| |