Re: differences in busybox configurations, part1 (longish)
Hello Ferenc,
2011/2/15 Ferenc Wagner <wferi@niif.hu>:
> Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 22:06, Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru> wrote:
>>
>>> FEATURE_SHADOWPASSWDS
>>> support for getspent() and friends.
>>> Current: deb n static y udeb n
>>> Proposed action: enable for deb
>>> Discussion: It is quite unexpected that busybox can't
>>> use shadow passwords. On the other hand, there's just
>>> a few applets which actually deals with passwords, and
>>> most of them are disabled for deb build.
>>
>> I'd say to enable it on deb since it can be an important applet for
>> embedded people to rely on.
>
> I have the gut feeling that static busybox was mostly used for testing
> cross-built system images under Qemu user-mode emulation. I can't serve
> with references now, but a web search would surely give you relevant
> hits. That's why the current static config is so much different from
> the other two: all three serve rather different purposes (deb: initramfs
> and rescue, udeb: d-i, static: full system testing). However, maybe the
> emulation use case isn't present anymore, since qemu-user gained the -L
> option... I hope embedded people can report on the current practices.
Once upon a time there was an attempt to have a cross built Debian
derivative based around busybox instead coreutils et al, it was named
Crush and Neil Williams did an amazing work through some packages to
be able to cross build them.
Crush development has been postponed until multiarch is ready but some
of the bits for the proof of concept can be found at emdebian svn [0].
Currently I cannot tell if that is an important option or not for
cross-built systems derived from Debian.
Best regards,
[0] http://www.emdebian.org/trac/browser/current/target/busybox-crush/trunk
Best regards,
--
Héctor Orón
"Our Sun unleashes tremendous flares expelling hot gas into the Solar
System, which one day will disconnect us."
-- Day DVB-T stop working nicely
Video flare: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap100510.html
Reply to: