busybox at mips

[walter harms]

hi Thorsten,
did you clear your FS before installing the old busybox ?
if not you may have a dangling link somewhere that is used now
and causes the system to error while booting.

re,
 wh


Thorsten Hirsch wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> today I wanted to update the busybox version on my nas device, which
> is a mips platform. The old version was 1.4.1 (dynamically linked) and
> I did a backup of the executable file /bin/busybox.
> 
> I downloaded version 1.9.1, applied the one available patch, did a
> "make menuconfig" and kept all default settings except for
> "disable /usr", which was deactivated, but since my executable did not
> reside in /usr/bin, but in /bin, I thought it would be a good idea to
> tell busybox, that /usr shall not be used.
> 
> The compilation worked fine, I did a "make install" and overwrote the
> old /bin/busybox with the new busybox binary. To check if it works, I
> just called "busybox --help", which worked fine, showing me the new
> version string. Great! Then I did a reboot and that was the last time,
> I've seen the prompt of my nas device. :-(
> 
> It seems to hang during boot. I can see some hdd activities and at
> least the daemon that switches the power led from blinking state to
> static on state is working (because the led stops to blink after some
> seconds). But the network doesn't work: no ssh and no ping. The nas
> device is also not accessible by its default/fallback ip address. I
> even monitored the ethernet activities with "tcpdump -vvv", which
> normally tells me "hey, there's a new device with ip address
> 192.168.11.150" when the nas device is powering up, but this time it
> doesn't tell me anything at all.
> 
> But hey - I've got a backup of the busybox binary! So I disassembled my
> nas device, plugged its hdd into my computer, mounted the drive,
> moved /bin/busybox to /bin/busybox.new and /bin/busybox.old
> to /bin/busybox, reassembled the drive, pushed the power-button
> and ...still the same error! :-(
> 
> Now I need your help. I guess "make install" has done something
> destructive. But what? I had the impression that it didn't do anything
> at all, that's why I manually copied the busybox executable into /bin.
> But I guess I was wrong. Meanwhile I've read something about a libbb.
> Has "make install" overwritten my old libbb?The old busybox executable
> was not linked against /lib/libbb.so, so I have no backup of the old
> one.