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