Nope. it's easy. That's why I've done it. Adrian On 15 November 2010 01:43, John Hein <jhein_at_symmetricom.com> wrote: > Adrian Chadd wrote at 11:40 +0800 on Nov 14, 2010: > > I've committed the below changes to -HEAD. You can now create and build > your > > own busybox style binary system, completely cross-compiled within the > > existing Make framework. It isn't as impressive as it sounds though - a > lot > > of the framework is already there from just building crunchgen'ed > > rescue/sysinstall binaries. > > > > There's a few things which should be done. Specifically, being able to > build > > an alternative set of libraries before building the crunchgen target. > The > > base crosscompile system may include support for PAM, Kerberos, ATM/IPX, > etc > > but you may not want your crunch'ed image to have them. To do this right > > now, you have to disable these features in the main build. That may be > OK > > for some. > > > > But just to stress it - I've got a couple of access point images at home > > running a crunchgen'ed environment under MIPS and besides the obvious > binary > > bloat, it works perfectly well. Besides a cut-down startup framework, > the > > image cross-builds entirely from the base FreeBSD source tree. > > > > Let me know if you'd like to give it a shot and I'll put my "bsdbox" > > Makefile scripts online to try. > > That's great. > I assume it be not be hard for someone to take your scripts as a > starting point and create a sysutils/bsdbox akin to sysutils/busybox? >Received on Wed Nov 17 2010 - 02:07:11 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:09 UTC