On Thursday 22 March 2012 00:08, Laurent Bercot wrote: > > I've been looking at the boot_info.script.sh and it has some issues > > with busybox? > > There is a lot of software out there. Most of it will have some issues > with busybox. That does not mean it is a problem with busybox. Or do you > expect busybox to work with every buggy shell script that J. Random Newbie > publishes on the web ? > > You could ask the script author to fix the bashisms and gnuisms in his > script. You could also do it yourself. You could use another, better > script with a similar purpose. You could install GNU coreutils and bash > and run the Boot Info Script as is. I have no idea why you chose to > contact the busybox mailing-list over those four obvious alternatives.
In fact I think it's useful to know what fails when people use bbox instead of std tools. What is wrong, though, is that Michael provides incomplete bug reports. He says: "I've been looking at the boot_info.script.sh and it has some issues with busybox?" Well, duh, *what* boot_info.script.sh? What issues exactly? "The sed uses '2~1 that seems to just be used to insert blanks after the first line, but gets an unsupport option with busybox sed." Can I have an *exact* sed command which fails? -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
