| 1 |
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 06:27:29PM -0400 or thereabouts, Ren? Rh?aume wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Still probably no harm in having a minimalistic perl around in the |
| 3 |
> > portage tree. We just cant promote such ideas and being any part of |
| 4 |
> > proper embedded solutions due to file size and memory/cpu consumption |
| 5 |
> > that goes along with using perl itself. |
| 6 |
> Exactly, I would like a minimalistic Perl, not pushing Perl into |
| 7 |
> embedded systems really. I just thought embedded projects like cutting |
| 8 |
> the fat. Sorry for the inconvenience my wording caused. As miniperl |
| 9 |
> means trouble, I will try the perl-base way. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> > Weather putting autotools on an embedded system is |
| 13 |
> > wrong or not... you can build a very small version of |
| 14 |
> > Perl if you are using uClibc. Then just control which |
| 15 |
> > perl packages you emerge. |
| 16 |
> I was writing about the main Perl package only, not the extra CPAN modules. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I put perl on my embedded system, yes it was large, but I had the whole thing |
| 20 |
down to 26megs(cramfs) and it ran very well. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I poked around with miniperl for about few hours and it became clear it |
| 23 |
wasn't worth the effort. I ended up just deleting the extraneous perl stuff |
| 24 |
after the install and it was down to around 8megs. |
| 25 |
I also needed some extra modules like IO-Socket and IO-Multicast, which would |
| 26 |
not have been easy to integrate with minperl. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
you can put perl on an embedded system and not go to jail i promise ;-). |
Archives