Described here:
http://r0bertz.blogspot.com/2010/04/show-real-swap-usage-for-each.html
FYI,
Rob
--
Latency is more important than throughput. It's that simple. - Linus Torvalds
___
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
On Monday 17 May 2010 06:23:30 Natanael Copa wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote:
On Thursday 13 May 2010 18:05:53 Peter Tyser wrote:
Using 'read' without a variable is not supported in many shells. Lines
such as 'while read; do' in
On Tuesday 18 May 2010 17:54:44 Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Hey Rob, please do abstain from biting our contributors. :)
Ok. Sorry.
Rob
--
Latency is more important than throughput. It's that simple. - Linus Torvalds
___
busybox mailing list
On Wednesday 19 May 2010 06:12, Rob Landley wrote:
Which is why you say #!/bin/bash and then teach busybox's shells to
understand
the name bash. The name is a promise of an API beyond Posix.
I'm not understanding the argument
for using bash-specific functionality, but not using bash as
On Monday 17 May 2010 09:41:36 Matthew Stoltenberg wrote:
We probably want some kind of config option for the alias, so bash and
busybox can easily be installed side by side without interfering with
each other.
Rob
I'm not the best at wording, but see the attached patch.
Matt
Looks
On Thursday 20 May 2010 03:04, Rob Landley wrote:
On Monday 17 May 2010 09:41:36 Matthew Stoltenberg wrote:
We probably want some kind of config option for the alias, so bash and
busybox can easily be installed side by side without interfering with
each other.
Rob
I'm not the
On Wednesday 19 May 2010 22:22, Oliver Noll wrote:
Hello. Is it possible to implement the net direction (/dev/tcp) in the built
in shell?
What syntax do you need supported?
--
vda
___
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
On Monday 17 May 2010 16:41, Matthew Stoltenberg wrote:
We probably want some kind of config option for the alias, so bash and
busybox
can easily be installed side by side without interfering with each other.
Rob
I'm not the best at wording, but see the attached patch.
I did it a
snip
Maybe some other shells happen to allow read without arguments, but its
a crapshoot as its not a standard.
Which is why you say #!/bin/bash and then teach busybox's shells to
understand
the name bash. The name is a promise of an API beyond Posix.
That's fine by me, adding
On Wednesday 19 May 2010 22:34:09 Peter Tyser wrote:
snip
Maybe some other shells happen to allow read without arguments, but its
a crapshoot as its not a standard.
Which is why you say #!/bin/bash and then teach busybox's shells to
understand the name bash. The name is a promise of
On 20 May 2010 at 3:46, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
From: Denys Vlasenko vda.li...@googlemail.com
To: busybox@busybox.net
Subject:Re: Adding bash support to hush: the todo list.
Date sent: Thu, 20 May 2010 03:46:24 +0200
Copies to:
On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 23:38 -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
On Wednesday 19 May 2010 22:34:09 Peter Tyser wrote:
snip
Maybe some other shells happen to allow read without arguments, but its
a crapshoot as its not a standard.
Which is why you say #!/bin/bash and then teach busybox's
12 matches
Mail list logo
