[BusyBox] which shell?

Ray L rayl at otii.com
Sun Aug 5 20:34:15 UTC 2001


On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 08:17:47PM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:

> ash, msh, and lash are certain to have a long life in busybox.
> I really like hush, but I am not as certain of its future, since
> it has some problems, and needs someone willing to tend to its
> care and feeding,

interesting!  what is the reason for maintaining 3 or 4 shells, versus a single
shell with configuration-time feature selection?  surely a single unified shell
would reduce duplicated coding and debugging effort?  or are they really that
different from each other?


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ray Lehtiniemi <rayl at mail.com> <rayl at otii.com>





More information about the busybox mailing list