svn commit: trunk/busybox: coreutils include

[Rob Landley]

On Sunday 07 May 2006 10:12 pm, Jason Schoon wrote:
> Here is where my suggestion starts.  Why don't we add udhcp back into the
> tree, and busybox-ify the heck out of it?  Worst case, you are still better
> off than having no DHCP code at all.  No offense to Rob, but I would rather
> have this than a quickly-written, largely untested alternate version.  As a
> future ground-up replacement, sure, but not thrown in to this release.

I'd rather focus on getting other stuff into this release myself.  As I said, 
fiddling with dhcp at all was not on my near-term agenda before an external 
repository was nailed to the tree.

> Best case, you end up with a much smaller and more optimal version of some
> fairly robust code.
>
> The argument used to be that we didn't want to modify an external project.
> Well, having a fork of our own is better than having none at all, so I say,
> fork away.  It's not like we don't have our own version of countless other
> packages already.

I thought about just copying the old directory back in (which would be _way_ 
more convenient for me), but if I do that what's to stop Mike from just 
deleting it again like he did last time?

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.