[re]Bug in busybox base applet?

[Bernd Petrovitsch]

On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 06:10 -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Thursday 01 September 2005 04:04, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > I can imagine that there are situations where you do not want (or able)
> > to install tens of sym-links (and just use shell functions) just have
> > one binary named "busybox".
> > I just can't get a good example together.
> 
> A) Isn't this what the standalone shell is for?

Then I don't need busybox anyway.

> B) How does the binary being named "busybox" screw this up?

Relying on the (exact) name "busybox" screws this up if the the name is
"busybox-suid".
Relying on prefix "busybox" seems to be the simplest solution.

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services