On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 13:22 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> To put this another way, I think it is probably reasonable that we > >> should be able to build an image from OE-Core with basic functionality > >> like networking without busybox? > > > > That's what I'd support. If everything you need for the functionality with > > busy > > box is in oe-core, to me, it doesn't make sense to go outside core to get > > that > > same functionality without busybox. > > irrespective of this change. I see yet another configuration with this > into OE-core, overall OE-Core should get smaller > and case does not sound convincing to me. You dont want to use busybox > in a fairly large image which has other GPLv2 software in > it. Thats fine but doesnt look like a common usecase to me
Nobody mentioned GPLv2, that isn't relevant here. I have heard OE being dismissed since it can't produce an image without busybox in it. The implication is we can't build "big" Linux, only small embedded things. The pieces we need busybox for are tiny and should be easy to replace (like this does). So I can see a fairly compelling argument for OE-Core to be able to generate a busybox free image with standard functionality just from a PR perspective. From what I gather we have people willing to test and maintain it too... Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
