xiaoxiang781216 commented on PR #17216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/17216#issuecomment-3434948794

   > > > So nsh still has room for improvement, right?
   > > > If it's just a size issue, why can't nsh be optimized to support 
Android init syntax, rather than making a drastic change like replacing the 
initialization path?
   > > > My other question is, why is Android's approach the right one? Is it 
because apple IOS isn't open source?
   > > > If functionality is aligned with Android, I don't think it's 
necessary. Each operating system has its own unique characteristics. I like 
implementations that are superior to Nuttx/Android systems.
   > > 
   > > 
   > > @anchao Beyond code size, also take into account the monitoring and 
management of daemons. As a shell, NSH may already have sufficiently rich 
functions; however, much of the work in system initialization is irrelevant to 
the core responsibilities of the shell. Separating and organizing them may make 
the overall logic clearer.
   > 
   > So you're also going to provide capabilities similar to Android's 
Zygote/SystemServer/Firmware Manager, right? So if an app using NSH wants to 
use these capabilities, it must use Android Init, right? Why this strange 
design? Is it difficult for NSH to implement these capabilities?
   
   It's more strange to couple the initialization into shell, do you see any 
other POSIX OS implement in this way? From the concept, init must be one 
instance and never exit, but shell may be lunched many times(telnet, ssh, adb 
shell...) or killed.
   
   @JianyuWang0623 's work is the right direction to decouple the 
initialization from nsh from the architecture. But, it's also has other benefit 
too:
   
   1. In many simple case(bootloader, ota), we can enable init, but disable nsh
   2. Implement the different init solution


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to