| 1 |
On 18/03/2011 13:53, Arkadi Shishlov wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 03/18/11 13:41, Ed W wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Any other ideas on shrinking the install further? (I'm a bit reluctant |
| 4 |
>> to strip too many core modules at this stage until the final build is |
| 5 |
>> decided - also most only consume a few KBs...) |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> If the perl workload is fixed, then 'strace -efile' the scripts and package only |
| 8 |
> necessary files. Worked for me some time ago. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
This is certainly true. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
In my case I want to allow a little room for future customisation, so it |
| 14 |
would be good to keep the packages fairly generic. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Without going into too much unnecessary detail I'm trying to use a |
| 17 |
stacked (aufs2) set of squashfs modules to implement my embedded |
| 18 |
environment. (Think Slax). So I'm trying to build a base installation |
| 19 |
which will support add-on modules that are as yet unwritten... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I'm not all that constrained on storage actually. At the moment I think |
| 22 |
in terms of "a few MB saved" being useful rather than "a few hundred |
| 23 |
bytes" saved. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I reckon I can keep nearly all the base perl install in just a few MB if |
| 26 |
only I can figure out how to cut down the various character translations... |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I guess this is best posted to the perl mailing list - anyway, hopefully |
| 29 |
interesting to some |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Cheers |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Ed W |
Archives