On Saturday 21 March 2009 16:08:02 Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Saturday 21 March 2009 20:54, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 March 2009 13:07, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > > what's the nommu status of hush ? nommu is the only reason msh
> > > > > lives on.
> > > >
> > > > hush is working on NOMMU.
> > >
> > > you dont happen to know off hand feature parity between the two ? msh
> > > doesnt support a whole lot, but it'd be annoying if one of those things
> > > were missing in hush. i'll switch the Blackfin dist to hush after our
> > > release (in the process of freezing/making), so we'll get some testing
> > > there ...
> >
> > What msh does and hush does not support:
> > * here documents
> > * (cmd)
> >
> > Support for `cmd` in both msh in hush has a bug: if cmd
> > produces a long output, say `cat big_file`, both will
> > hang. This is because of vfork being used. hush warns
> > about it at build time, msh does not.
> >
> > The second one I am a bit surprised, I though only (cmd;cmd)
> > is not supported, but I just tested and simple (cmd)
> > also does not work:
> >
> > # ./busybox hush -c "(echo Hi)"
> > hush: nested lists are not supported on NOMMU
>
> On the other hand, msh is "supporting" it by basically treating
> (cmd) as if it was a { cmd; }
>
> # ./busybox msh -c 'var=1; (var=2); echo $var'
> 2
>
> I sure can make hush do that, it's trivial, but is that useful?
no, because it's wrong. the answer should have been 1. having hush reject
the code rather than lying and corrupting the parent shell env is better imo.
-mike
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
