Busybox make, modify my /dev/null on host
Christian MICHON
christian.michon at gmail.com
Thu Feb 14 14:09:24 UTC 2008
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Paul Fox <pgf at brightstareng.com> wrote:
> okay. educate me. why _shouldn't_ gcc remove the output file in
> that case? if gcc removes the target of -o in all other cases,
> then, in my opinion, /dev/null shouldn't be special. if it's
> important that gcc be able to do "test runs" without creating
> output, then there should be a "test run" option that says,
> "don't create an output file". or maybe "-o -" should be
> implemented, to allow writing to stdout, so it can be redirected
> to /dev/null.
the real issue is more that /dev/null becomes a normal file.
>
> but gcc shouldn't be burdened with understanding the special
> needs of the developer for specific file arguments. running
> builds as root is like performing on the high wire without a net.
> you need to understand the limits of your equipment. should gcc
> also be told that it should refuse to write output when given "-o
> /dev/hda1", if /dev/hda1 is a mounted filesystem? how smart do
> we expect our tools to be?
agreed.
--
Christian
--
http://detaolb.sourceforge.net/, a linux distribution for Qemu with Git inside !
More information about the busybox
mailing list