chroot option for loginutils

Harald Becker ralda at gmx.de
Thu May 12 19:57:42 UTC 2011


 Hallo Sergey!

>> A feature that easily
>> can be achieved with Busybox included applets (do you call sed usage or
>> some shell scripts "doing by hand"?).
> Yes, because there is many cases to process if you want to implement
> generic configurable script. I have tried and decided that it is
> better to use existent busybox applets.
I do not know, what you are going to do. From my experience I know it is
relatively easy to create scripts for the purpose of adding users/groups
... especially if you reduce to specific cases of usage.

... but I'm not going to talk about your requirements, as I do not know
the details.

> Of course it is configurable and I think that there will not be any
> bloating of code for disabled option. I will check it tomorrow.
That is acceptable.

> I do not insist on including it in the mainline, but if it will not
> affect size and functionality of general case, then why not.
> It is provided in attempt to be useful for somebody. Personally I will
> statically compile busybox with 5 applets for x86 and will use in my
> builder/installer in couple with buildroot.
Inspired from your current request, I just posted a feature request for
the Busybox web site ... a central library of contributions ... like an
application store.

That is, I see the usefulness of your patch for a corner case, but not
as a feature in main line. In such a library we could offer scripts for
extended functionalities. Like unimplemented commands or wrappers to
implemented applets but with extended functionality (like your request)
... or may be as a place for patches like yours.

--
Harald


More information about the busybox mailing list