[klibc] bunch of small fixes
cjwatson at ubuntu.com
Sun Jul 13 08:39:32 PDT 2008
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 05:19:12PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 03:03:30PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > (That said, I see no particular reason not to carry on using busybox
> > chroot in our initramfs.)
> hmm anything i missed on top of my patch?
No, just inertia ...
> i don't like to *have* to rely on busybox in initramfs as
> embedded people should just be able to choose BUSYBOX=n MODULES=dep
> and thus have a smaller initramfs.
> (yes one can do even better, but i plan to package that postlenny)
Oh, I'm not arguing with getting klibc chroot fixed, that's obviously
the right thing. Just saying I'll be doing other things rather than
rushing out to revert the workaround, that's all. :-)
Colin Watson [cjwatson at ubuntu.com]
More information about the klibc