[BusyBox] Re: Fix for "more" and "ps" on dumb terminals
Erik Andersen
andersen at lineo.com
Fri Jun 2 17:36:11 UTC 2000
On Fri Jun 02, 2000 at 09:15:06AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello, Erik!
>
> First of all, CVS is basically Ok. There is one minor issue. I cannot see
> available modules by running "cvs co -c". You should check out CVSROOT and
> add to the file "modules" at least following:
>
> busybox busybox
> tinylogin tinylogin
>
> And then check "modules" in. Now check what "cvs co -c" shows.
oops. Fixed now I believe. Thanks for the tip.
[andersen at dillweed busybox]$ cvs co -c
andersen at busybox.net's password:
busybox busybox
modules CVSROOT modules
tinylogin tinylogin
uC-libc uC-libc
> > > By the way, you may want to put some common code in both versions of
> > > ps_main() to a separate function if you happen to hack ps.c
> >
> > Yeah. I've actually been debating removing the devps patch stuff,
> > since Linus has given the decree that it will never go into the kernel.
> > What do you think? Should I axe it?
>
> I think you shouldn't remove your patch. The reason are following:
>
> 1) There are systems that are really short in non-volatile memory.
> Actually, the system that my company produces, has just 4 Mb of onboard
> flash. Fortunately we could make 32 Mb ATA Flash cards work, but we had a
> backup plan. devps would be the way to go.
>
> 2) Linus doesn't like your patch today, but he can change his mind during
> the 2.5 series.
>
> 3) Busybox is basically intended to be run on systems with kernels built
> for those systems, not with prebuilt kernels from e.g. RedHat or
> YellowDog. Hence patching the kernel is not a problem.
>
> 4) GNU Hurd can only implement mountable filesystems, such as /proc using
> translators, i.e. userspace programs. The translator should have another
> way to get information about processes from the microkernel. This means
> that devps (in some form) is not only easier to implement in GNU Hurd, but
> that it's probably required to implement procfs. The same may apply to
> other microkernel OS'es.
>
> 5) As long as you keep the code duplication minimal it is not such a big
> deal to support devps.
Thanks for the vote of confidence. I was kindof bummed when Linus
rejected it (I had put a fair bit of work into making it) and was
thinking my work had been wasted. Thanks for the good reasons why
it was worthwhile. :)
BTW, we need to get you CVS write access. Want to use pserver or ssh?
-Erik
--
Erik B. Andersen email: andersen at lineo.com
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
More information about the busybox
mailing list