[BusyBox] Improving Our Development Process _after_ 0.49

[Erik Andersen]

On Wed Jan 24, 2001 at 09:23:15AM -0800, Larry Doolittle wrote:
> I appreciate all the discussion on this subject, and
> it even sounds like progress.  I will resist commenting
> on _my_ prejudices for how the directories should be laid
> out, how many binaries to build, what files to split out,
> and how many build options to give the "customer".
> 
> I _will_ guarantee that busybox/tinylogin/netkit-tiny
> et al. will suffer major breakage during the transition
> to a more long-term maintainable project architecture.
> 
> BusyBox has seen a significant number of bugfixes and
> core improvements in The last six weeks.  That needs to
> be checkpointed and announced as an 0.49 release, _before_
> we start a major reorganization.

Yes, of course.  0.49 will be released today and will be almost exactly the
same as what we have now in CVS.  There are a few little patches I want to look
over this morning and, possibly, apply first.  I was going to get it out
yesterday, but then I ended up having to spend the day hacking on on _old_
version of uClibc (don't ask) and getting an ethernet driver to behave itself.

> Questions I have for 0.49:
>     Can we resolve the buffer allocation issue any better?
>        (like choosing stack vs. xmalloc at compile time)

I like your patch to allow folks to choose.  I'll apply it (extended
to other apps) so that folks folks can choose for themselves which 
they think is better...

>     Can someone with CVS commit rights do a s/maintainence/maintenance/ ?

fixed -- sorry about that.

However, I am rethinking these warning messages altogether.  It seems that the
vast majority of folks would prefer to not split out netkit-tiny.  As such, it
may be appropriate to simply pull these messages.

>     Can we put in insmod -L support?

I think that is fair.  Do we have a proper patch that also handles the
locking issues?  Or shall we just not worry about the locking?

>     Would everyone please try the current CVS tree on their production boxes?

Yes, YES!  Please everyone!  Pound on it!

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen   email:  andersen at lineo.com
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--