Re: [Xen-devel] some thoughts on appstacks and app-tools

[Antti Kantee <pooka@xxxxxx>]

On 16/07/14 11:10, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Is the expected format documented somewhere?  E.g. ipv4 vs. ipv6,
> > default router, dhcp, etc?  xl-network-configuration is a little vague
> > about it.
> No.  And as an OS author you are in theory looking at the wrong
> document: that document is aimed at the host administrator.  In theory
> you should be looking at the guest interface docs, of which the
> relevant bit seems to be
>    http://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/misc/xenstore-paths.html
> but sadly that doesn't mention the "ip" backend field.
That didn't help, then.  I'll need some further specs, but I assume 
those don't exist at least at the moment.
> > > I mean that the domain config file could say
> > >     disk = [ "vdev=xvda, mountpoint=/etc, target=/path/to/blah.ffs" ]
> > > and libxl would put the mountpoint info in xenstore so something
> > > in the rump kernel Xen environment would pick it up.
> > Sounds good.  Can we pass arbitrary parameters a la fstab?
> Not currently but perhaps we should be able to.
I'll wait for further specs and decisions on how to proceed from your 
side here too.
> > > Busybox is a single application, not a build tool.  I wasn't aware of
> > > crunchgen.  That does sound like it could do the job.
> > Ok.  They are usually mentioned together, so I thought busybox was the
> > Linux equivalent of crunchgen, kinda in the lsof(8) vs. fstat(1) sense.
> I don't know what crunchgen is other than what you have said here.
> busybox is a reimplementation of a bunch of utilities written in such
> a way that they can all be built into the same executable and dispatch
> off argv[0].
>
> So they don't sound very similar, although they solve some of the same
> problem.
crunchen is the same, except it builds existing utilities with something 
like -DSMALL.
> Notably, busybox's implementations are very minimal.  One of busybox's
> aims is to be small (for installers, initramfs, etc.).  A traditional
> GNU userland coreutils would be too big.  So no-one in the Linux world
> would think of generating something to do busybox's job by smooshing
> together coreutils ls and coreutils cat and so on.
>
> ISTM that crunchgen might be useful, especially if there's a way to
> specify whilch subsets of the BSD tools are included.  ls will be
> quite fat compared to (say) mkdir and mknod.
Not too fat.  NetBSD includes a "rescue" crunch in the default 
installation, for purposes of when you b0rk your ld.so or whatnot. 
Looks like it's currently ~6MB in size on amd64 and includes ~150 utils:
http://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src/rescue/list

We wouldn't need many many many of those, e.g. ksh or init.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel