g.esp at free.fr
Fri Jun 6 06:12:40 PDT 2008
Selon marty <marty at goodoldmarty.com>:
> > I disagree with your premise. man pages are useful, especially if you
> install an uncommon version of a command (e.g. busybox). I'm not convinced
> about locales and non-English documentation, but support for Unicode on the
> command line might be handy if I can get dig compiled with IDN support. Of
> course, I'm not building a server for my own use. I'm working on an appliance
> that my company can offer for sale. Chris Buxton Professional Services Men &
> Mice On Jun 5, 2008, at 3:03 PM, marty wrote:
> >> > Ah, gotta love it. Stupidy.
> >> >
> >> > checking how to build HTML documentation... not built
> >> > configure: error: cannot build HTML documentation
> >> > BARF...
> >> > ./configure --drop-the-friggin-docs
> >> >
> Don't misunderstand my point.
> Man pages are useful, but they don't have any place on the production
> I certainly don't want docs, man, groff, texinfo, locales, or even a
> on my gateway appliance,(which runs embedded off a small CF and has no IP's).
> It is very hard to remove all those things cleanly, once they find their way
> into the build. Better to nip them in the beginning, with a optional global
> The real problem is how they have become dependencies(above error). I fixed
> with --disable-html, but gcc must be modified to install without texinfo.
> Removing locales, charmaps, language bindings, would probably trash glibc.
You could make install evething on the building machine.
That does not imply everything will be installed on the target machine.
On IPCop, we produce a list of files installed by each package.
With all packages files list, we commented out the files we don't want and those
files will not be include in the final tarball holding everything to be
You could don't care about gcc, doc, man and every files you don't want.
More information about the hlfs-dev