I am the developer Isaac was talking about.

On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx> wrote:

>
> Are you sure it really _needs_ them? They seem to be mostly
> optimizations to avoid walking uninteresing parts of the tree, and it
> should be possible to achieve the same behavior (aside from time
> wasted walking uninteresting stuff) with minor changes to the callback
> function...
>
> You are right that they are optimisations; that would be my guess too. The
utilities need to scan through all directories and files on multiple
filesystems - the more layer added to aufs, the worse it would be. Thus it
needs any optimisation it can get. I'm not the author of aufs-utils so I
can't be so sure.

Right now I managed to get it compiled with uclibc so at least the size
problem is resolved in the interim, but I prefer to use musl if possible.

cheers!
James