The time now is Tue 19 Feb 2019, 20:45
All times are UTC - 4 |
Page 2 of 2 [26 Posts] |
Goto page: Previous 1, 2 |
Author |
Message |
sunburnt

Joined: 08 Jun 2005 Posts: 5087 Location: Arizona, U.S.A.
|
Posted: Sun 26 Aug 2012, 11:54 Post subject:
|
|
Yes, I realize BusyBox isn`t for the purpose of reduced size.
I just question it`s seeming general usefulness, and it`s value in Squash based systems.
I have no doubt that there`s a lot more going on with it.
If it`s truly an enhancement then perhaps it should be expanded?
Add in sed, grep, cut, paste, comm, awk, and perhaps even more...
This would "containerize" most of the loose Linux utility files.
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
Ibidem
Joined: 25 May 2010 Posts: 553 Location: State of Jefferson
|
Posted: Sat 09 Feb 2013, 03:17 Post subject:
|
|
Busybox has sed, awk, lpd, vi, fdisk, mkfs, fsck, and so on--it's enough to build the kernel, combined with binutils, gcc, and make. You probably want CONFIG_DESKTOP, though.
I've actually usedit as a full standalone OS.
IIRC, UPX hurts because it ends up killing the self-exec trick or something similar--could be wrong; I remember they mentioned it was NOT good for anything which has multiple instances.
I'd expect Busybox to be an improvement on compressed filesystems due to reduced filesystem io-it self-executes from RAM that is required just to run it, so you don't have it eating up cycles on decompression or cached in ram.
The big space savings (IIRC) was actually in just having one ELF header.
A shared, split Busybox with libbusybox.so was ~6-7 MB in the 1.18 timeline (an interesting config option that is well hidden: enable PIC, then edit .config and uncomment it; I forget the name of the option...)
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
technosaurus

Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 4850 Location: Blue Springs, MO
|
Posted: Sat 09 Feb 2013, 04:37 Post subject:
|
|
The problem with libbusybox.so is that it only exports the <applet>_main functions, not the other functions that could be useful for linking against for creating other apps (I believe this was brought up on the mailing list at some point) ... things like the zlib/bz2/xz, md5/sha1 and other numerous helper functions, but this is likely due to license choice being gpl vs. lgpl - industry isn't usually interested in gpl-ing a major work, but now there is toybox.
_________________ Check out my github repositories. I may eventually get around to updating my blogspot.
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
scsijon
Joined: 23 May 2007 Posts: 1389 Location: the australian mallee
|
Posted: Sat 27 Jul 2013, 21:52 Post subject:
Re: system optimization techniques |
|
technosaurus wrote: | Wondering whether or not to recompile a program in your puplet to eliminate large shared libs that are only used once or twice
Code: | for x in ${PATH//://* }/* ; do [ -x "$x" ] && objdump -x $x 2>/dev/null & done|grep NEEDED|sort |uniq -c |sort -n >binaudit |
this will tell you how many times each library is needed (if it isn't on the list, it can likely just be removed --- not always though, need to remember dlopen and/or plugins may use it too ... in "module" mode)
now open binaudit in your text editor and get to work, starting with the ones that are needed only once ... you can build them in statically
|
Turned it into a shell script (easy) and ran it, it's interesting and usefull, however was wondering if you would be willing to extend it to start from / and test against all installed files and all subdirectorie depths and of course their libraries directories.
It could then become a tool for backtesting a completed build, and fill a void that we don't have now.
As you know, i'm not much of a coder and somedays just thinking is a mental migrane.
thanks
scsijon
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
technosaurus

Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 4850 Location: Blue Springs, MO
|
Posted: Sun 28 Jul 2013, 21:20 Post subject:
|
|
If you start at /, it will check libs too even if no binaries use them. Waste of time and not useful. Maybe add some from /usr/share and $HOME, but those should really get fixed to be in proper locations.
_________________ Check out my github repositories. I may eventually get around to updating my blogspot.
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
slavvo67
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Posts: 1593 Location: The other Mr. 305
|
Posted: Wed 21 Jan 2015, 21:17 Post subject:
|
|
Interesting thread.... The first example on page one did not work on Tahrpup.
Best,
Slavvo67
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
technosaurus

Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 4850 Location: Blue Springs, MO
|
Posted: Thu 22 Jan 2015, 00:01 Post subject:
|
|
slavvo67 wrote: | Interesting thread.... The first example on page one did not work on Tahrpup. | ...not helpful at all.
_________________ Check out my github repositories. I may eventually get around to updating my blogspot.
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
greengeek

Joined: 20 Jul 2010 Posts: 5404 Location: Republic of Novo Zelande
|
Posted: Thu 22 Jan 2015, 03:02 Post subject:
|
|
technosaurus wrote: | Portability |
You mentioned some tips about portability in this other thread. There were some good links posted in that thread too. Do you have a summary that could be posted in your subsection at top of this thread?
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
Keef

Joined: 20 Dec 2007 Posts: 934 Location: Staffordshire
|
Posted: Thu 22 Jan 2015, 14:29 Post subject:
|
|
Actually it does work on Tahrpup. Maybe you (slavvo67) couldn't find the 'binaudit' text file?
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
potchan

Joined: 05 Apr 2008 Posts: 109 Location: Pilots' Height Tel Aviv - Yaffo, Israel לינוקס_פותחן
|
Posted: Sat 29 Sep 2018, 22:23 Post subject:
System optimization techniques Subject description: for such as me whose aspirations are a bit bigger than coding capabilities |
|
Hello, I'm Timmo' from http://potchan.org.
My main s(q)fs file is a 3.0G. size CREAMED to 3.8G. to earn about 15 s' in mounting out of total 1.5 min' mounting depends on PC. I find this discussion interesting regarding BIHIHIHIG sqfs needs to be 'educated' in a more manner to ststistically mount the more essentials faster instead of just scanning it. In my humble POV busybox gives a partial-frozen solution to it. Two points to relate to...
1. 's(q)fs' making with new codes: to run the 'naked' basis "/" on desktop partition with some essentials such as network and browser (for instance). The system will acquire it in several plays statistically (best will be thousands times) and then we freeze it into sqfs or sfs which is the basis.
- a possible con of this may be the specific HW coder uses. So we must find the "average politically-correct standard agreed" APCS new negging standard for it, and we as community may compromise a lot doing it right... if "right" is a some absolute value out there...
2. to do the same on "savefile.4fs" or save folder and the user will 'teach' the system according to specific HW and habits on the run, "next time will be faster" in a better way.
Alternatively, we create several of "file.4fs" or save folder on shelf for various users and machines. Not a BarryK vision at all (and not mine at all).
Which one - or which combination - we do better or shorter way ?
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
nosystemdthanks
Joined: 03 May 2018 Posts: 563
|
Posted: Fri 30 Nov 2018, 23:57 Post subject:
Re: System optimization techniques Subject description: for such as me whose aspirations are a bit bigger than coding capabilities |
|
potchan wrote: | So we must find the "average politically-correct standard agreed" APCS new negging standard for it, and we as community may compromise a lot doing it right... if "right" is a some absolute value out there... |
it isnt like that at all. there is no standard. basically people do whatever they want, and a small portion of that filters up into official this or that.
afterwards, official this or that comes back down and is reused to make about 100 derivatives. maybe its 10. lets say its in that range.
for the most part, this works out. instead of traveling the world to find out what people are running, you can pretty much just download a copy of the setup they like most. its not completely accurate, because some people add features they dont use because "someone else might."
though basically every setup is different, and somewhere between 10 and a 100 users even offer you a copy of theirs for you to try. theres no standard. posix and woof help keep some things familiar. a very practical reinterpretation of your question is to start with your "what do people want" question and simply ask: what would you like to have? then stick that in a distro (you already have-- 12 virtual desktops! fun!) and offer it for people to try. whats missing? what would you like? smaller sfs files? thats doable.
_________________ teaching computing via learning applications is like teaching cooking via going to a restaurant.
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
|
Page 2 of 2 [26 Posts] |
Goto page: Previous 1, 2 |
|
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 vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|