On 2025-11-30 10:50:28, Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 30/11/2025 à 01:41, Steve Litt a écrit :
> > Didier Kryn said on Sat, 29 Nov 2025 10:11:11 +0100
> >
> > > Let me suggest to
> > > build a static Busybox and install it on /bin and /sbin; it'll take
> > > you less effort, and the concept has fun by itself, which Slackware
> > > hasn't.
> > Questions:
> >
> > 1 Have you actually done this?
>     Yes. During several years.
> >
> > 2 Did you like the result?
>
>     First, it was in a custom initramfs, therefore not in Debian proper, but
> in a custom pre-boot system for Debian on Powerpc. It was necessary and it
> worked wonderfully on a production system.
>
>     Later I built a Linux-Busybox OS on a USB key to test Vdev, when Jude
> Nelson was developping it. It was the last time. It did the job.
>
> > 3 Was it fun to do?
>     The first thing you do when starting to develop your init process is to
> tell the kernel that the init program is an interactive shell (Busybox comes
> with two shells). Here you are: at the very beginning of it all. DIY; here's
> a part of the fun. But Busybox is fun to discover also.
> > 4 Did you use Busybox init?
>
>     Never. For my professional project, I devised my own init script. It was
> in a very peculiar case, with several diskless SBCs using a shared
> filesystem mounted on NFS, or, optionnaly, a local filesystem on a USB key.
> The init script detected the configuration automatically.
>
>     For Vdev test, the goal was essentially to test vdev, and there wasn't
> much init to do.
>
> > 5 Are you pretty knowledgeable about this subject?
>   I'm like a kind of veteran user, let's say. Not up to date, but with good
> remembrance.
> > 6 Would you like to give a remote presentation on this at GoLUG?
>
>     Don't think like doing that. I haven't fun in doing presentations, it
> would take me a lot of work and logistics. I'm buzy enough.
>
>     It seems there are plenty of people on this list who have the desire to
> play with this sort of things like tweaking the boot process or having
> static applications. Rather than painfully compiling lots and lots of
> applications, I say they would have less pain with building a static Busybox
> and start playing with it.

The creator of Aboriginal Linux hangs out on this list. That's an
absolutely bare minimum Linux built using the bare minimum number of
packages. I've used it for a client years ago, and contributed the x486
support. It uses busybox.