On Tuesday 20 April 2010 16:48:16 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > this is a ton of duplicate crap and exactly why i suggested we look at > > > integrating something like gnulib/ for portability. busybox shouldnt > > > be wasting any time at all on this. > > > > How about a subproject for the above stuff? We can get rid of them > > easily once something like gnulib is intergrated. > > how about we integrate gnulib now and then we dont need a subproject. > subprojects take time to setup, integrate, and then break down.
Wait... You're proposing taking 1) a "layer of indirection" library 2) from the GNU project 3) which is incompatably licensed under GPLv3 (when we took GPLv2 code from kernel developers years ago in a bunch of places)... And adding it to a project that doesn't even depend on external libraries to do its compression support (zlib, bzlib, lzma), one which doesn't use the readline library for command line editing, one which doesn't use the external curses library for parsing keyboard escape sequences or drawing on the screen... You think block copying gnu code into busybox is a good idea: http://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/manual/gnulib.html#Library-vs-Reusable-Code > Classical libraries are installed as binary object code. Gnulib is different: > It is used as a source code library. Each package that uses Gnulib thus > ships with part of the Gnulib source code. The used portion of Gnulib is > tailored to the package: A build tool, called gnulib-tool, is provided that > copies a tailored subset of Gnulib into the package. This package is a neat summary of everything BusyBox has ever stood in opposition to. We eliminate layers of indirection, we take total ownership of our implementation down to libc (or sometimes even system calls) so that we can rip it apart and shuffle it up to shave another 5% off as often as possible... And the gnu guys do that instead. I'd consider the proposal for integrating that into busybox to be a troll of epic proportions, except this being Mike I expect that's an honest reflection of his judgement about what a good idea looks like. Rob -- Latency is more important than throughput. It's that simple. - Linus Torvalds _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
