[uClibc] Re: Again some buildroot patches
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Mon Jan 12 05:15:27 UTC 2004
On Sunday 11 January 2004 05:10, Matthias Kilian wrote:
> Mega-OOPS :-)
>
> Indeed, it's 0.60.5 here. But not because of debian (I deny the existence
> of distributions), but only because I didn't update for more than a year.
>
> I'll update my busybox ASAP.
If you can come up with a testcase for something the new sed doesn't do that
you need, let me know and I'll fix it. (I'm on the road a bit the next week
or so, and seem to have acquired a raging cold from traveling, but I'll get
to it as soon as I can.)
> > Of course busybox doesn't have everything. It hasn't got an
> > implementation of make, diff, or bison.
>
> That's o.k.; for *large* tools, it wouldn't be worth to put them into
> busybox, possibly reimplementing them.
For make and bison, I agree with you. Diff is a borderline case, it might be
possible to slim it down enough...
> > And since when is "ed" part of a development
> > environment? [...]
>
> You can do scripted inplace-editing with ed (without explicitely using
> temporary files, as required by sed). So I would not state that no one
> uses ed scripts anymore. OTH, one could probably use ex instead of ed,
> and ex is part of vi.
sed -i for in-place editing.
I haven't added that to the busybox version yet, but it's on my to-do list.
uClibc's buildroot uses it...
> > Just because configure worked doesn't mean it produced the correct
> > output. Extract two trees, run one with the gnu tools in the $PATH and
> > run one with busybox in the $PATH, then compare the results. (Easiest
> > way to debug this stuff, I've found. Shows you what it was expected to
> > do, and where it diverged...)
>
> I'll try to rebuild everything and check for differences with an updated
> busybox today or tomorrow.
Cool. I look forward to hearing how it works for you...
> Ciao,
> Kili
Rob
More information about the uClibc
mailing list