| 1 |
i dont want to discuss the logistics of how this will be done just yet ... |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
the idea is to remove 'sash' from our system target and replace it with |
| 4 |
busybox ... there are a few applets that sash implements and busybox does not |
| 5 |
(chattr ed file lsattr printenv sum where), but i added chattr, lsattr, |
| 6 |
printenv, and sum to busybox yesterday :) ... i've never heard of 'where' and |
| 7 |
going by its behavior in sash, it's basically 'which' ... that leaves us with |
| 8 |
'ed' and 'file' which i think we can ignore and be OK ... |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
for those of you who do not know, busybox is a single binary which implements |
| 11 |
the functionality of most system utils ... it does not completely implement |
| 12 |
some features, just the most common ones, but then again sash does the same |
| 13 |
thing :) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
details: |
| 16 |
- busybox implements a *ton* more applets ... it can be configured to replace |
| 17 |
over 100 system funcs while sash provides about 35 ... |
| 18 |
- size wise, busybox would be larger, probably by about ~150k - ~200k |
| 19 |
- busybox commands are transparent while sash requires you to prefix internal |
| 20 |
commands with a '-' ... so running `cp` in busybox will use busybox's cp |
| 21 |
while sash needs to run '-cp', and you can still execute the real cp by |
| 22 |
doing /bin/cp in busybox |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
feedback !? |
| 25 |
-mike |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives