No subject

writing additional utilities that need to directly at an API level
interact with Busybox and its applets.

On 13/09/2007, colin <colin at realtek.com.tw> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Our platform is with low cpu power and an application using "system" api too
> many times will draw down cpu performance.
> These statements are like system("/bin/mkdir ..."), system("/bin/touch
> ..."), ... and system("/bin/rm ...").
> I am thinking if the application is linked with libbusybox.so, we can call
> corresponding functions and then avoid "fork process".
> Is this a good way? The help page says that libbusybox is under experiment
> and I am afraid it's not stable.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Colin
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> busybox mailing list
> busybox at busybox.net
> http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
>