Re: [libposix-development] Selective compilation

[Henrique A. <hd...@gm...>]

 I've made a list of all the packages that install files in /bin and
/sbin in my system. Some of them are simple. Maybe bzip2 is a possible
choice, however it uses extensions, at least in x86 (it uses the
open64 family of functions). Maybe we can compile it without
extensions. Also, we can get the list of all the functions imported by
the binaries with realdelf. With the function list we're building, we
could attribute a difficulty grade for supporting each program, and
follow the order, starting from the easiest. :-)

alsa-base
alsa-utils
apparmor
bash
binutils-static
brltty
bzip2
console-setup
coreutils
cpio
csh
dash
dbus
debianutils
dhcp3-client
dmsetup
dosfstools
dpkg
e2fsprogs
ed
fuse-utils
grep
grub
gzip
hal
hdparm
hostname
ifupdown
initscripts
iproute
iptables
iputils-ping
kbd
klogd
libc6
libpam-modules
linux-restricted-modules-common
login
makedev
mktemp
module-init-tools
mount
nano
netcat-traditional
net-tools
ntfs-3g
parted
passwd
pcmciautils
powermgmt-base
procps
psmisc
readahead
reiserfsprogs
sed
sysklogd
sysvinit-utils
tar
udev
upstart
upstart-compat-sysv
upstart-logd
usplash
util-linux
wireless-crda
wireless-tools
wpasupplicant
xfsprogs

2009/6/18 Chris Forbes <ch...@fa...>:
> I think that would be a good idea.
> That pile of m4 code is ... large :)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henrique Almeida [mailto:hd...@gm...]
> Sent: Friday, 19 June 2009 4:18 a.m.
> To: lib...@li...
> Subject: Re: [libposix-development] Selective compilation
>
>  Maybe we should choose another application ?
>
> 2009/6/18 Jim Meyering <ji...@me...>:
>> Henrique Almeida wrote:
>>>  I'm building a new libc implementation, called libposix, with a few
>>> volunteers. We'll begin to use a test driven development approach and
>>> we're considering GNU coreutils for our initial test case. I'd like to
>>> know if it's possible to build only small parts of coreutils, instead
>>> of the full package, during this initial evolution of libposix code.
>>> Ideally, it would be good if we were able to build only a single tool
>>> and its dependecies. Also, if that's not possible, maybe you could
>>> point other applications that would be useful to us. I'm also afraid
>>> that the configure script would not work with libposix in this stage.
>>> Is it possible to point out what are the requirements for the
>>> configure script ?
>>
>> The programs in coreutils depend heavily on gnulib.
>> The parts of gnulib used in coreutils are distributed throughout the
>> m4/*.m4 files (which are integrated into configure), lib/* files, and
>> Makefile snippets.  The sources and gnulib support are intertwined
>> enough that separating the src/*.c code from configure-time tests
>> is likely to be a challenging and subtly error-prone task.
>>
>
>
>
> --
>  Henrique Dante de Almeida
>  hd...@gm...
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
> royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
> server and web deployment.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
> _______________________________________________
> Libposix-development mailing list
> Lib...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libposix-development
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
> royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
> server and web deployment.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
> _______________________________________________
> Libposix-development mailing list
> Lib...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libposix-development
>



-- 
 Henrique Dante de Almeida
 hd...@gm...