On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 22:25 +0200, Christian Franke wrote: > Busybox does not use autoconf or similar. It requires manual platform > specific configuration which does not yet support a missing > sethostname(). After adding HAVE_SETHOSTNAME manually and some other > minor additions, busybox (which many commands enabled) compiles and > works reasonably. > Would ITP make sense ?
TBH I'm not sure. Presuming you're discussing the single-executable build (so as not to clobber coreutils etc.), there is still the question of (not) matching the heavily-patched coreutils wrt .exe handling etc. What do you think the use case would be? -- Yaakov
