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

Re: [BusyBox] BusyBox 0.52 wget broken



Erik Andersen wrote:
> On Mon Jul 23, 2001 at 10:13:23PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Erik Andersen wrote:
> > > On Thu Jul 19, 2001 at 11:49:19AM -0600, Matt Kraai wrote:
> > > > Howdy,
> > > > 
> > > > As noted by Per Wigren <wigren@home.se>, BusyBox 0.52 contains a
> > > > broken wget.  This will prevent debootstrap's http method from
> > > > working.  It has since been fixed in CVS, but a new version of the
> > > > boot-floppies should not be built until a new version containing
> > > > this fix is uploaded.
> > > 
> > > I was planning on getting a new busybox release out
> > > the door last night.  But then I got tired and fell
> > > asleep.  Hopefully today...
> > 
> > Any news on that issue?  Your mail is from July 19th and it's now July
> > 23rd (or something like that).  We're still struggling with this.  For
> > mipsel I've patched the wget.c file and it works now, but this should
> > be released somehow...
> 
> On July 20th, Matt Kraai reported that the wget bug (while it does exist) does
> not afflict the boot floppies.  So (since I am on vacation at the moment) I
> felt I was able to ignore the problem with a clear conscience and so I have
> been enjoying my vacation.  Your email seems to implay that Matt was not
> correct in his assessment.  Is this indeed preventing net installs, or merely
> preventing you from using wget at the command line?  If it is the former, I'll
> get a new package uploaded tomorrow (Tuesday).  If this bug is merely
> preventing wget from working at the command line, then I'll get a new package
> put together on Saturday, when I get back from my vacation in Yellowstone.

With the bug, debootstrap ends on mipsel with strange errors and wget
fails with a segmentation fault.  After applying the patch from cvs
and rebuilding busybox, rebuilding the initrd, rebuilding the kernel
image, rebooting, wget and debootstrap work satisfying.  So yes, I
believe that Matt was wrong.

Regards,

	Joey

-- 
In the beginning was the word, and the word was content-type: text/plain



Reply to: