Should BusyBox and uClibc also make a "flag version" like Embedded Linux?

[Bradley M. Kuhn]

Denys Vlasenko wrote at 22:34 (EST) on Saturday:

> If "flag" version of kernel wants to also carry an "endorsed" busybox
> with it, this might be useful - users will tend to upgrade both at the
> same time, finally replacing their ancient busybox-0.60.
>
> Not sure kernel people would bother to do that, though.

The inter sting thing about this initiative is that it is not a kernel
initiative per se, but something Tim is putting effort into in his
advocacy inside the embedded development circles he frequents.

I think Tim would probably be willing to note a flagged version of
BusyBox suggested for use with the flagged version of Linux.  If you
want me to get in touch with him about that idea, I will.  I haven't
communicated with him yet; I wanted to find out if it was something you
wanted first.


I had noted:
>> I do apologize if this discussion turned out to actually be a
>> pointless rat hole.

> I don't think it is useless. For me it was useful - I heard a few
> stories from the trenches.

Great!
-- 
Bradley M. Kuhn
President, Software Freedom Conservancy (BusyBox's organizational home)