DESKTOP mode

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 05:45:08PM +0200, Denis Vlasenko wrote:

>I believe that busybox now is mature enough to be almost usable
>on ordinary desktop machines. So I actually did that - replaced
>most of applicable /bin/* with links to busybox.
>I expect some fallout. I will try to fix it.
>
>Few examples: (1) Midnight Commander uses -v option when it calls
>g[un]zip. It is of course fixable in MC, but the goal is to make
>bbox usable on _unmodified_ desktop system!
>(2) od -t is used in bbox's own build system, but bbox od doesn't
>handle -t.
>(3) bbox build started to produce larger (+100k) executable
>from the same source tree and .config. Wow...
>Did not track down which applet affects this, and how...
>
>(1) and (2) are good examples of cases which do not matter for
>embedded world but are needed on desktop.
>
>Busybox should not lose its position of embedded device tool.
>I think it makes sense to introduce CONFIG_DESKTOP and put
>all such things under it. I will add such thing with gunzip -v fix.
>Non-DESKTOP bbox will silently ignore -v,
>DESKTOP one will print statistics.
>
>I know that increased attention to destop needs will inevibably
>lead to _some_ increases in size even for non DESKTOP case.

I'm not (yet) convinced that an additional DESKTOP mode is a good idea;
Up to now, we had most of the stuff that adds bloat under separately
tuneable config options, so you could toggle them at will if you need
them. I fear that the proposed desktop mode will make it mere impossible
to tune features in a fine-grained manner.
I wouldn't be opposed to a config-switch for CONFIG_APP_VERBOSE that
enables -v or it's equivalent in one central place. But what strikes me
as a bad idea is to add e.g. gunzip -v, and all other uncompressors -v
unconditionally. See?
>
>Please think also about positive side: with such move there is
>a chance that bbox will get much wider userbase and therefore
>will bring some sanity into desktop world.

Agree, that's a worthwile goal, but let's not penalize
resource-constrained setups!
>
>Of course contributions and corrections (and even rants about
>bloat) from embedded people are still accepted
>and encouraged.

Please don't add bloat in a way that cannot be toggled off.

thanks,