Adding bash support to hush: the todo list.

Rob Landley rob at landley.net
Thu May 20 01:04:27 UTC 2010


On Monday 17 May 2010 09:41:36 Matthew Stoltenberg wrote:
> > We probably want some kind of config option for the alias, so bash and
> > busybox can easily be installed side by side without interfering with
> > each other.
> >
> > Rob
>
> I'm not the best at wording, but see the attached patch.
>
> Matt

Looks good to me, although the config symbol name we choose might also control 
the actual ash extensions for hush ($RANDOM and {one,two} and ~= and so on).

Denys: with this in, does the generator script work on a busybox-hosted 
system?  (I.E. does the script run correctly under hush?)

If not, what needs fixing?  (I've found the best way to add functionality like 
this is pick something real that doesn't work, and make it work.  That way you 
know you're focusing on something real, and the thing you're trying to fix acts 
as a test case and regression test suite.  In my case, I'm interested in 
getting portage to work.  That won't even work with bash 2.05b, it needs 
3.x....)

Rob
-- 
Latency is more important than throughput. It's that simple. - Linus Torvalds


More information about the busybox mailing list