On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 14:15 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Sep 3, 2015, at 1:27 PM, Richard Purdie > > <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > > 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 assumed thats one reason to not include it. I am trying to understand > reasoning to > not include busybox. Or is is just because its a poster child for litigations.
The litigation issues surrounding it certainly don't do it any favours, but the main issue is that if busybox is there, we're not seen as a "proper/full" linux. > > 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). > > as we include other alternative providers, they get preference over busybox > applets > even if busybox is part of it. The problem is some people don't want any busybox. > > 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… > > PR I see. I was searching for technical reasons. Well, its technical but related to the image of the project too. Can OE-Core today produce a "standard linux desktop" type "full" featured filesystem? I cannot honestly say it can due to this reason, busybox has to be there. There are some people who do discount OE because of this. This isn't new, I remember Marcin amongst others working on this. We're close, but close doesn't mean we can answer "yes" to the question and I think it would be nice to be able to do so clearly. Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
