Re: [Astlinux-users] Coreutils compile problem (0.4 branch)

[Sebastian A. <sp...@sy...>]

Darrick Hartman wrote:
> Sebastian Auriol wrote:
>> AstLinux 0.4 branch from today (and older versions) fail to compile
>> in the coreutils package. I wanted to create an AstLinux image with
>> "The minimum needed to build a uClibc development system":
>> 
> Sebastian,
> 
> I'm trying to be as nice and patient as I can with your
> errors.  You get
> a D+ for following instructions though.
> 
> coreutils is not selected by default.  It is not needed for basic
> functionality on an astlinux box.  Most of these functions
> are already
> provided by busybox.

Just because a package is not selected by default means that it may not work
and is not supported? My bad. I thought the "Enable Experimental/Test
Packages" part signified you were selecting a dubious package... Who said I
was after "basic functionality"? I specifically said what I wanted in my
e-mail.

> Please refer back to previous note messages which provide complete
> instructions to have a working box.  Could coreutils be fixed
> to work?
> Probably.  Is it even on our list?  No.  The goal of this
> project isn't
> to add everything that you might find on a full blown Linux
> box.  It's
> to provide the needed functionality in the smallest footprint
> necessary to provide that functionality.
> 
> Darrick

What I am after today, as I said at the top of the e-mail you replied to, is
a minimum AstLinux development system since there are so many programs not
included in AstLinux that appear to be very difficult to compile for
AstLinux. If I had an AstLinux install with gcc, make, etc. than I could do
the compiling on the machine, and it would probably be a lot easier to
compile these tiny programs.

If you can suggest a way to set up all the paths, library paths, include
paths, etc. to point only at the right places in my build_XXX tree for an
arbitrary cc or gcc command, then of course I wouldn't need to build cc and
gcc into the AstLinux image and that would be even better. Unfortunately I
am no gcc expert and my attempts thus far appear to have resulted in
conflicting included files.

But forgive me for assuming that a package that has been in AstLinux for
some time (and maybe since the start), and is not labelled as experimental,
works. And, please forgive me for assuming that members of this list would
want to know if such a package did not work.

Kind regards,

Sebastian