Buffalo NAS-Central Forums

Welcome to the Linkstation Wiki community
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:11 am

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:35 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:21 pm
Posts: 51
Location: Germany
Hi!

As noted elsewhere, I compiled busybox 1.2.1 and am currently thinking about how to package this. I compiled it static (/bin/busybox is thus ~2.9M) and have enabled (close to) all "applets".

Packaging all of this isn't a problem, but I wonder what it should provide. If I compare what's on the system and what bb could provide, there are LOT of things, which already exist and which are not from bb. Things like:

/bin/false
/bin/grep
/bin/netstat
/bin/ping
/sbin/fdisk
/sbin/halt
/usr/sbin/chroot

etc.pp.

I'm unsure if I really should make my busybox package provide all of this.

You can find a file list of what busybox could provide at http://askwar.pastebin.ca/142266 - it's too large to paste it here... :p

Regards,
Alexander


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:48 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:19 am
Posts: 7703
Location: Austria, Vienna
in my opinion we should use the normal gnu stuff for the basic stuff. coreutils and so on. this would need more diskspace, but the full functionality would be there.

i want to use busybox for stuff that is really ok where only senseless options are missing. in fact i want to use busybox to implement some additional and usefull stuff like etherwake, dnsd and so on.

these commands for example are missing.

but i was in the same position....i have no clue which are needed as full versions and which are not.

...is cpio working with the newer busybox?

_________________
LS1 (2.6 kernel, foonas svn1062, 750 GB, UBoot 1.2) & LS Pro (FreeLink/jtymod/GenLink, changes all the time)
Thx to all donators!


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:46 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:21 pm
Posts: 51
Location: Germany
mindbender wrote:
in my opinion we should use the normal gnu stuff for the basic stuff. coreutils and so on. this would need more diskspace, but the full functionality would be there.


ACK. Makes sense. But I'd still think, that it would be a good idea to compile bb with all the options - reason: bb can then be used as a rescue system.

Quote:
i want to use busybox for stuff that is really ok where only senseless options are missing. in fact i want to use busybox to implement some additional and usefull stuff like etherwake, dnsd and so on.

these commands for example are missing.


True. dnsd is missing. I don't need it ;) My LS2 is not going to be a DNS server; my WLAN router does that. And because I don't like enabling "server options" when they are not needed, I didn't enable this. But I can of course enable it.

What about telnetd? IMO, this might make sense, as this could do away the need to install another package to provide a telnet server (like utelnet).

Quote:
but i was in the same position....i have no clue which are needed as full versions and which are not.


Yep. It's sort of a "strategic decision". For example, should bb also provide /sbin/init? If so, would it be used? It might make sense to have bb provide init, because this way, yet another package can be dumped. Or e2fsck. Or. or. or...

Quote:
...is cpio working with the newer busybox?


No. bb still only provides a "extract-only" cpio. The bb cpio cannot be used to create cpio archives.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:20 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:19 am
Posts: 7703
Location: Austria, Vienna
askwartemp wrote:
ACK. Makes sense. But I'd still think, that it would be a good idea to compile bb with all the options - reason: bb can then be used as a rescue system.

i agree.

askwartemp wrote:
And because I don't like enabling "server options" when they are not needed, I didn't enable this. But I can of course enable it.

i would enable it....as long as noone breaks into your LS it would make no harm.....also they do not use much diskspace.
i will also provide a full featured busybox 1.2.1...we can controll it via adding/deleting symlinks.

askwartemp wrote:
What about telnetd? IMO, this might make sense, as this could do away the need to install another package to provide a telnet server (like utelnet).

do it. i also compiled it a week ago with nearly all options. add telnet also...then you can telnet away from your LS. ftpput is also very usefull...i noticed that when i uploaded the LS pro GPL yesterday to the downloadsection.....i never thought of using the LS for uploading....

_________________
LS1 (2.6 kernel, foonas svn1062, 750 GB, UBoot 1.2) & LS Pro (FreeLink/jtymod/GenLink, changes all the time)
Thx to all donators!


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:22 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:33 pm
Posts: 1082
Location: United States of America
askwartemp wrote:
ACK. Makes sense. But I'd still think, that it would be a good idea to compile bb with all the options - reason: bb can then be used as a rescue system.


it seems to make sense this way to have the basic openlink distro be a contained fully functional system

regarding the other thread, does ipkg delete the symlinks and recreate them based on package installation? (ie with GNU utils?)
so as not to destroy what busybox had done before??
-KP

_________________
-Ramuk

LinkStation HG *250 Uboot - Foonas-EM - Freelink
Kuro HG *750 Uboot - Foonas-EM - Debian Squeeze
Kuro HD *60 Uboot - Foonas-EM - Debian Squeeze (For Sale)
KuroPro *2TB Debian Lenny Armel- Kernel 2.6.26
KuroPro *1TB Debian Lenny Armel- Kernel 2.6.25.6


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:46 pm 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:21 pm
Posts: 51
Location: Germany
ramuk wrote:
it seems to make sense this way to have the basic openlink distro be a contained fully functional system


Yes. What I was trying to say - should all of the functions really be provided by busybox? Should openlink rely on busybox to provide init, to provide cron, to provide syslog, to provide httpd, to provide ... or would openlink use specialized tools for this? If so, then I would say that these functions should NOT be enabled, as it's IMO bad to have unnecessary "cruft". It opens up the system to potential security holes - the more code there is, the more likely it is, that there are holes, even if they are not (yet?) discovered.

Quote:
regarding the other thread, does ipkg delete the symlinks and recreate them based on package installation? (ie with GNU utils?)
so as not to destroy what busybox had done before??
-KP


Yes, I undo what I did. I don't remove (as in delete) /bin/cpio but rename it. In the postrm script, I re-rename /bin/cpio, so that there's a /bin/cpio after the cpio ipk has been removed.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:57 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:26 am
Posts: 3701
Location: JAPAN
Scrap it. This is small and cute. We have loads of disk space and do not require cut-down packaged utils such as this. I agree with the above statement of not wanting to introduce untried and tested code. We need to be careful with openlink and not make this update get too bloated. This should be a stepping stone to Freelink, I believe. My opionion only and hopefully will not upset others.

_________________
LS used as PVR and streaming source


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:08 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:19 am
Posts: 7703
Location: Austria, Vienna
lb_worm wrote:
Scrap it. This is small and cute. We have loads of disk space and do not require cut-down packaged utils such as this. I agree with the above statement of not wanting to introduce untried and tested code. We need to be careful with openlink and not make this update get too bloated. This should be a stepping stone to Freelink, I believe. My opionion only and hopefully will not upset others.


as i already said i want to move most of the stuff to real gnu stuff. it will be the better way. busybox is nice, but andre had enough problems with it in my opinion. i also think that there is enough space.

we can use of /mnt/ as well with symlinks....so i see no problem.

_________________
LS1 (2.6 kernel, foonas svn1062, 750 GB, UBoot 1.2) & LS Pro (FreeLink/jtymod/GenLink, changes all the time)
Thx to all donators!


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:11 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:26 am
Posts: 3701
Location: JAPAN
Good plan. The GNU code is better (busybox has been re-written to reduce code size) and has better support.

_________________
LS used as PVR and streaming source


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited