On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 13:22 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > 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
In general, I don't think it is a good idea for oe-core to be entirely beholden to busybox or any other package, and I would be all in favour of including an alternative implementation for everything that we depend on busybox for. In the specific case of ifupdown, the whole thing seems a little bit 1990s and it's hard to avoid the sense that there are better ways to solve that particular problem nowadays. But oe-core does already include net-tools, which is if anything even more retro (and is in a similar position vis-a-vis busybox) so there is precedent for including this kind of thing. It's also not as if ifupdown is a large piece of software with a complex web of ABI dependencies that will introduce some huge maintenance burden in the future. So I can't see any real downside to adding it to oe-core. p. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
