[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: busybox

Erik Tews <erik.tews@gmx.net> writes:

> On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 01:05:20AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> > Erik Tews <erik.tews@gmx.net> writes:
> > 
> > > Is anybody going to create a new version of boot-floppys for potato with
> > > a new version of busybox? Because the current one is unable to mount a
> > > nfs-share.
> > 
> > I was told NFS mounting worked for potato boot-floppies....?
> I can only tell you what I have done. I toasted the 2.2r3-floppys,
> started the system, and was unable to mount anything.

I need to know the exact version number of boot-floppies you are
using, which arch, and which flavor (if i386).

> And if I remember right, there have been big changes in nfs at
> kernel 2.2.19 and busybox fails to compile on a sid-system because
> of an error in a file which had nfs and mount in his name.

Yes, we dealt with this in 2.2.21:

  * Ryan Murray: busybox back-port from woody for NFSv3 compatability, new
    with the new libc6 package for 2.2r3

> > I don't think so it's critical enough to fix, if it's broken.  But if
> > it is still broken, someone could patch Potato utilities/busybox
> > (boot-floppies on the potato branch) and send that here and I would
> > apply it on Potato for next release.
> I think it is very critical. It is easy to fix. Just use a new
> busybox-version.

No, wrong answer.  I am not upgrading busybox in Potato.

If NFS truly is broken in 2.2.23 boot-floppies (the latest), and I can
get a patch to fix it, then we can release a new boot-floppies with a

If not, then not.

.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onshore.com.....<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>

Reply to: