More bbsh design notes.
Rich Felker
dalias at aerifal.cx
Thu Sep 14 18:51:13 UTC 2006
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 02:36:51PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Thursday 14 September 2006 5:23 am, Allan Clark wrote:
> > On 9/14/06, Ian Oliver <lists at foxhill.co.uk> wrote:
> > > ...
> > >
> > > BTW, did I mention that on this here embedded box in front of me, the
> Korean engineers
> > > who hacked all the calls to ifconfig, route, etc. into udhcpc also got it
> to directly
> > > write the IP address and netmask into known places in memory? So, I'll be
> needing
> > > config options for where to write the values, and I'll need them endian
> swapping. :)
> >
> > winxksh is a shell that has a "call" function: toss the arguments onto
> > a stack (strings?) and call the dlsym() of the entrypoint.
>
> Why does that have to be a shell function? It could be a standalone
> executable. (Yeah, it reloads/unloads the library a lot. Can't say I care.)
Agree totally. There's no reason whatsoever to put bloat like this
into a shell.
Rich
More information about the busybox
mailing list