On Sunday 25 April 2010 12:30:20 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > 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. > > you cant have it both ways. either busybox replicates what gnulib is doing > and wastes time on nothing useful, or people *optionally* use appropriate > gnulib modules when the target in question sucks (i.e. mingw), or busybox > doesnt support any of these systems.
http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/98-99/logic/falsedichotomy.html > i dont care about supporting mingw or any other non-Linux target, but i do > care about integrating/maintaining cruft that distracts from busybox's > purpose. "Doctor, it hurts when I do this". > gnulib satisfies the people who want to use it on other systems > while minimally distracting people who dont care. "Obviously we must sever the offending nerves". Busybox was pretty much _built_ on "well don't do that then"... > > 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. > > *yawn* > -mike I've reached the point where it's not that I don't trust your technical judgement, it's that I trust it to be consistently bad. 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
