On Saturday 07 October 2006 7:18 pm, Jim Gifford wrote: > Chris, > I'm looking into the issue. But I was wondering if you have tried > using Bash, busybox doesn't work properly for builds due to fact it's > missing a lot of the necessary features needed for building programs.
The busybox _shell_ may not work (I was in the process of doing a bbsh to replace bash when Bruce Perens drove me away from the project), but I spent three years making the rest of the darn thing work. I have personally built a Linux From Scratch system where /tools contained nothing but kernel headers, uClibc, binutils, gcc, make, busybox, and bash, and then built the rest of the system from that. Specifically, I used BusyBox to replace coreutils, diffutils, e2fsprogs, file, findutils, gawk, grep, inetutils, less, modutils, net-tools, procps, sed, shadow, sysklogd, sysvinit, tar, util-linux, and vim. And half of bzip2 (the compression-side support I did wasn't merged, it's buried in the busybox mailing list archives). Rob -- Never bet against the cheap plastic solution. _______________________________________________ Clfs-support mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cross-lfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clfs-support
