On 2011-05-11 10:13 AM, Emmanuel Deloget wrote:
On 05/10/2011 07:03 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
On 2011-05-10 3:37 PM, Emmanuel Deloget wrote:
Hello,
I'm facing an interesting porting challenge : one of the program which
is to be installed on our target is compressed using upx. As you may
kn
On 05/10/2011 07:03 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
On 2011-05-10 3:37 PM, Emmanuel Deloget wrote:
Hello,
I'm facing an interesting porting challenge : one of the program which
is to be installed on our target is compressed using upx. As you may
know, upx-compressed programs are not to be stripped (st
On 2011-05-10 3:37 PM, Emmanuel Deloget wrote:
Hello,
I'm facing an interesting porting challenge : one of the program which
is to be installed on our target is compressed using upx. As you may
know, upx-compressed programs are not to be stripped (strip removes
everything but the stub, resulting
On 05/10/2011 03:30 PM, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
Hi,
a less invasive method is setting
RSTRIP:=true
in your package Makefile.
(Not: true in this context means /bin/true)
Agreed, it's less invasive than the change I made.
My question is more "should OpenWRT provide more stripping options to
p
Hi,
a less invasive method is setting
RSTRIP:=true
in your package Makefile.
(Not: true in this context means /bin/true)
~ Jow
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Hello,
I'm facing an interesting porting challenge : one of the program which
is to be installed on our target is compressed using upx. As you may
know, upx-compressed programs are not to be stripped (strip removes
everything but the stub, resulting in a 300 bytes program that does
nothing bu
