Re: [dev] Adventures with static linking

From: Paul Onyschuk <>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 23:38:00 +0100

On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:49:51 +0000
Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:

> But, think of the hyphens!
> Not that this should cause any trouble with existing rm
> implementations, but you'll never know what syntactic extensions GNU
> might come up with for userspace in-rm chroot filesystem hierarchies.

Aboriginal Linux uses Busybox, not GNU coreutils right now. There is
also related project maintained by Rob Landley called toybox - main
goal is to write simpler (code-wise) BSD-licensed replacement for
Busybox. Last weeks toybox mailing list was busy, so I'm looking
forward to that.

On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:55:50 +0000
Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:

> Thanks for a great reading. :)
> Do you intend to compile all modules you might use into a single
> perl binary? Or just enough to compile stuff, and then stick to
> shell scripts and Lisp?

I'm not sure if it was great, but I would like to see Stali or
something similar moving forward.

I compiled just default modules for Perl. Still this is good question,
probably Python is more a issue: think Mercurial.

btw. I'm more awk type (lua is also nice) ;)

On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:59:14 -0500
Kurt H Maier wrote:

> Perl has facilities to easily embed modules. In my opinion, the best
> one is staticperl:

Currently I'm exhausted, so this will wait. I have seen too much
configure errors, compilation errors, linker errors and make errors,
that I was close to mental breakdown. I feel like this guy [1] - it is
a great presentation (less than 25 minutes worth spending time) about
debugging complex systems. I agree with his remarks that:

"It's packaging other people's software that makes system administrators
violent people".

Received on Tue Feb 14 2012 - 23:38:00 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 14 2012 - 23:48:04 CET