[BusyBox] choice for reserving buffers

[Mark Whitley]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 12:50:52PM -0800, Larry Doolittle wrote:
> 
> Everybody who uses BusyBox is a customer.  People who have
> no credible alternative get extra consideration.  A quick
> look at the BusyBox home page leads me to believe there are
> quite a few such customers.  :-)  Unfortunately, I can't
> require them to speak up on the mailing list.

The more I've seen of this discussion, the less convinced I am that we need to
make these special-case considerations for a stack vs malloc approach to
dealing with buffers. Larry, I appreciate very much the work you did on the
patch to toggle between stack/malloc, but I'm not sure that it's even all that
necessary. (Please do not take this as a slight against you, Larry, I
appreciate you adding some real, live code to the discussion, but having heard
the discussion, I don't feel like I've heard a really strong case for it.)

All in favor of Larry's patch, speak up.

> Erik, do you have a list of intended and/or "supported" targets
> (or target categories)?  I seem to remember reading such a list,
> but I can't find it now.

Here's what I can recall right off the top of my head:

	arches: x86, ARM, MIPS, SH3/4 (I think)
	libcs: libc5, glibc, uClibc
	kernels: Linux 2.0, 2.2, 2.4 (unless someone says otherwise)

> BTW, you can add
>   <a href="http://recycle.lbl.gov/~ldoolitt/bse/">Linux on nanoEngine</a>
> to your users list if you want.

Thanks, committed. Changes will be updated to the web page when the cron job
runs.

Mark Whitley
markw at lineo.com