lua [ was: Bash shell support? ]
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Wed Aug 30 16:43:32 UTC 2006
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 8:40 am, Roberto A. Foglietta wrote:
> We would appreciate very much a scripting language which interpreter
> could be compiled against busybox library in order to reduce the
> overall size.
>
> I think soon or later you will decide to have a directories for
> contribution or a separate project as rootbox which using bbox library
> allow people to have a lot of funny thinks to enjoy embedded.
Ok, remember how when libbb.so went in my main complaint was that I have no
interest in trying to export a stable API for use by third party projects,
and people were going to assume that we were, but that I was warning them
loudly up front that I refused to get tangled up in that unsupportable mess?
> Lua in other hand should help to simplify bbox converting some
> applets which not require the powerfull of C (almost all which should
> not need syscall) in scripts which, I suppose, will have some
> advantages: smaller size, could be modified/fixed without compiling
> anything, portability.
BusyBox is written in C. We have enough trouble getting developers on the
same page with one implementation language. And requiring a 40k lua
interpreter for what would otherwise be a 6k app is just silly.
If you want to reimplement busybox applets in lua, have at. Feel free. I'm
all for this. I have no interest in looking at the result, but go for it.
Start with tomsrtbt, they've already done some of this.
Rob
--
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.
More information about the busybox
mailing list