[klibc] difference between busybox and klibc (faq?)

maximilian attems max at stro.at
Thu Mar 27 08:53:28 PDT 2008

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 04:29:50PM +0100, octane indice wrote:
> what is the difference between busybox and klibc?

the obvious one is that klibc provides a minimalistic c standard lib
the utils are reduced to those useful for an initramfs boot environment.

if you want to see klibc usage, you can clone debian's initramfs-tools
git clone 	git://git.debian.org/git/kernel/initramfs-tools.git

and no klibc has no manpages.
> Say, I want to use an initramfs in order to mount root over nfs, I can
> choose to use klibc with ipconfig and nfsmount? But I can also choose to use
> busybox with ifconfig and mount.

initramfs-tools provides an nfsmount implementation.
busybox will have to be linked against a c lib that you
need to put in initramfs too.
> So what's the difference, and why and in which case one is preferable to the
> other?

klibc is been tested and heavily used in the early boot userspace.
> If it's a FAQ, I'm sorry, just give me the link

if you have more specific questions don't be shy to post them.



More information about the klibc mailing list