On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Per Hallsmark wrote: > well... the exact same style is made in other places > for nommu portability.
that's because the other places dont have the same problems hush does ... they account for the nommu issue, hush isnt even close to doing so > So, while not perfect, it's better than other current > solutions at least for our usage. no, because it implies hush has been tested and known to *work* on nommu when in reality it's clearly known to not and the code clearly doesnt account for it -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
