Re: An "ELKS BusyBox" is in progress; 24.5% size savings so far!

On 2/19/12, Jody Bruchon <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm pleased to announce my development of a sub-project I am coining
> "BusyELKS" which serves the same purpose for ELKS that BusyBox does for
> larger Linux systems. I have spent most of my evening combining the
> files under elkscmd/sh_utils into a unified binary that executes the
> requested command based on its invocation name, and the savings just for
> sh_utils is awesome! Ignoring the "uname" tool which currently does not
> compile, the binary size total drops from 61920 to 46732, a whopping
> 15188-byte (24.5%) drop in size! See for yourself:
> 648     ../sh_utils/basename
> 7232    ../sh_utils/date
> 536     ../sh_utils/dirname
> 360     ../sh_utils/echo
> 212     ../sh_utils/false
> 536     ../sh_utils/printenv
> 1836    ../sh_utils/pwd
> 212     ../sh_utils/true
> 3788    ../sh_utils/which
> 1896    ../sh_utils/whoami
> 328     ../sh_utils/yes
> 1896    ../sh_utils/logname
> 7256    ../sh_utils/tr
> 8320    ../sh_utils/xargs
> 7900    ../sh_utils/mesg
> 16148   ../sh_utils/stty
> 2816    ../sh_utils/test
> -----

In the source bcc development package, under the directory "tests",
there is the source of
a "ft" (file tool) command. The last version includes 15 file
utilities such as cat, cp mkdir, etc.
apparently not as basic as their elkscmd counterparts. It might be worth to copy
the file to elkscmd.