Question about TIMEOUT applet.
ralda at gmx.de
Mon Jul 15 20:14:17 UTC 2013
Hi Rich !
>> > (at least newer) coreutils package contain a TIMEOUT command
>> > with a slightly different syntax then Busybox. Is this
>> > intentional or a bug? What about upstream compatibility?
>> No, it is not intended. This needs to be fixed.
>It seems to me the safest fix would be to keep the -t option,
>and only interpret the first non-option argument as the timeout
>value if the -t option was not specified on the command line.
>This would make the busybox version accept both its old syntax
>and the coreutils syntax.
Sounds good to me ... I'm trying to provide a patch for this. It
is just going to be a bit delayed due to other problems / duties
here around. Lets see what I can do tomorrow or the day after.
More information about the busybox