A Modest Proposal for JHALFS Enhancement
Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net
Fri Mar 27 00:19:48 PDT 2009
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Mike McCarty wrote:
>> This would have two desirable consequences. First, the sources
>> could reside on an immutable medium, like a CD-ROM,
> Nothing prevents you keeping a copy on CD-ROM now.
What I mean is it would not take up disc space. I have a system
which I'd like to build on, which has a small hard disc.
> and not
>> consume precious (on small systems) disc space. Second, the
>> sources would be immutable, and hence not subject to accidental
> This doesn't make sense to me. If you want to put it on a small system, build
> it on a workstation and copy it to the small system. It sounds like a painful
> process to build on a small system, especially when there is no need. After
> all, if you do this, you don't need to copy *any* sources to the small system.
Your observation makes a lot of sense for people who have the resources
to do what you propose. However, I'm a laid off telecomm engineer
putting together a system out of pieces of left over stuff I have lying
around. Since I don't have anyone who has stepped up and volunteered to
supply a system with more resources, I need to use what I have, which is
cramped for disc space. It would help if the sources didn't have to
reside on the same medium with the built images.
> There are other considerations. The build process takes a lot of room. glibc
> takes 1.2G, but the final system is only about 250M and a *lot* less if you
> strip it down.
> That said, I'm sure the JHALFS team will look closely at any patches you want to
I'll see what I can do. It's not clear to me how the tool sets
up the directory to do the decompresion into, but I'll investigate
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
More information about the lfs-support