Is libbusybox stable for standalone application?

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 03:28:50PM +0800, colin 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.

Nowadays i'd link against busybox (built as PIE) and call foo_main(...)
etc. The API is not guaranteed to be stable but works fine for me (in
practice it doesn't change that much).

HTH,
Bernhard