Baslinux mailing list

[sindi keesan <keesan AT sdf.lonestar.org>]

On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, David Moberg wrote:

> sindi keesan wrote:
> > make allyesconfig just worked !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> > I hope BL3 uses busybox sed.
> >
> > So I tried /usr/bin/ar instead.  It is older but bigger.
>
> And it's not from busybox. The busybox one is unsuitable for
> compiling.

Why does busybox include an ar that you can't use to compile busybox?

> > I removed the /bin/ar (busybox ar symlink).  It is compiling.....  but got
> > stuck on hdparm.  HDIO_SET_BUSSTATE undeclared (along with quite a few
> > other things about HDIO and BUSSTATE).  I could try a make without hdparm,
> > assuming it needs a later glibc to build.
>
> Your 2.2.16 kernel headers are too old. I should have thought
> of that. uClibc comes with newer headers. I wonder if the busybox
> hdparm, after compiling, will even work on 2.2?

I would have to get it compiled with uclibc to find out, I guess.
Or try the 2.4.31 headers, which are being mailed to me as part of SW10.1.
Would the result work with 2.2.16 or do I need to compile for the kernel 
that I am using at the time of compilation?

I forget if a uclibc-dynamic busybox would work with kernel 2.2.16 and 
uclibc.

> > Can I hand-edit .config?
>
> Good luck. I don't think menuconfig is very hard - it's much easier
> than make config if you just want to turn one thing off.
I could hand-edit to remove hdparm and fuser but not the next problem.
I once hand-edited Makefile to make drvmidi without ALSA.

> > INSTALL definitely says to 'make allbaseconfig' but Makefile has a line
> > about 'allbareconfig', that makes all applets without any options.
> > Should I report this problem with INSTALL to the busybox people?
>
> Yes, that is definitely a problem.

I signed up with the busybox people to be allowed to report a 'bug' but 
did not get the email to confirm with, for about 8 hours now.


> > I have not tried using uclibc to compile yet. I somehow thought it would
> > be easier with glibc and gcc from SW8.1.
> >
> > One uclibc busybox that someone (Stephen Clement?) compiled had several
> > non-usable programs (mv etc.) so I was avoiding it if possible.
>
> I don't know why Stephen's busyboxes do not work on 2.2. The
> ones that I compiled with uclibc worked fine. Maybe his kernel
> is too new?

So you suggest a static uclibc compilation with kernel 2.2.16?
What kernel headers did you use?

> OK. If you're not scared off yet, you might try make allnoconfig
> and then make. Then add just a few features at a time and see
> if you can get something to work.

Some time, maybe after I do taxes.  This could take up a lot of time.
hdparm would have actually been useful on our one computer.
> David