[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