[BusyBox] Init utility options are too general

[Cameron Rich]

I realise that. But we incorporate busybox into an auto-build process. 
That means an (internal) busybox patch which is not really necessary.

I don't believe we are the only embedded software company that writes 
our own init (which we do as an msh shell script), so this is likely to 
upset more than just us...

Cheers,

Cameron


tom at ceisystems.com wrote:

>Cameron,
>	Assuming that there is nothing specific to the BusyBox init in
>the halt/shutdown/reboot applets, then this would really be a matter of
>hacking the .in files used by the menuconfig system.  You would simply
>tell the applets mentioned above that they do not require init to be
>included.
>	Of course, if there _is_ any dependance on the BusyBox version
>of init, then you, or someone in the community, will most likely have to
>code around that issue and apply the above idea.  Anyway, just my
>2-cents.
>
>Thomas Cameron
>CEI Systems, Inc.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cameron Rich [mailto:CameronR at nulec.com.au] 
>Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 11:59 PM
>To: busybox at busybox.net
>Subject: [BusyBox] Init utility options are too general
>
>
>Version: busybox-1.00-pre
>
>When using "make menuconfig":
>
>Disabling "init" in "init utilities" disables halt, poweroff and reboot.
>
>These are utilities that are still useful even if a customized init is 
>being used (such as what we are doing). We'd still like to be able to 
>individually select the other utilities ("reboot" in our case) and 
>disable "init".
>
>Cheers,
>
>Cameron
>_______________________________________________
>busybox mailing list
>busybox at busybox.net http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
>
>  
>