tar bugfix patch n.347 (recoded, version 4)
rob at landley.net
Fri Dec 23 05:48:54 UTC 2005
On Thursday 22 December 2005 09:47, Roberto A. Foglietta wrote:
> > We can`t change fork() to vfork() trivially, this applets use BSS
> > variables (prezeroed) and for vfork() is not separetelly.
> trivially it does not work, fail correctly but hangs in case of success
> [roberto at wsraf busybox-1.01_raf]$ ./busybox tar tvzf /tmp/test.tar.gz0
> tar: unexpected end of file
> tar: null size tar archive
> [roberto at wsraf busybox-1.01_raf]$ ./busybox tar tvzf /tmp/test.tar.gz
> roberto 22515 0.0 0.0 1792 424 ? S Dec21 0:00
> tar xvjf /tmp/test.tar.bz2 busybox
> roberto 22516 0.0 0.2 5308 1428 ? S Dec21 0:00
> \_ tar xvjf /tmp/test.tar.bz2 busybox
> a vfork busybox tar is running on my workstation since yesterday...
> ...and it is growing!!!
What on _earth_ are you talking about?
> Applaying patch n.4 and restoring original open_transform.c works too:
Use of open_transform.c here is something I need to fix. (have you seen my
personal todo list?)
> So at least under the point of view of storage patch n.4 do not add
> anything... Unbelivable... I do *NOTHING*
> emh.. why a such thing could happen? Two different branch of the same
> binary which has the *exactly* same file size and different behaviure?
How big are the two different busybox base applets with tar not compiled in?
I think we shrank the base busybox applet slightly.
> may be better memory usage benchmark than ps could reveal differences.
Top is actually pretty good, but the raw data for a process's runtime memory
usage is cat /proc/$PID/maps for the appropriate process $PID.
Steve Ballmer: Innovation! Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.
More information about the busybox