Your message dated Sun, 26 Jul 2026 23:26:25 +0300
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#248151: busybox-static: please provide some "don't
fork()" option
has caused the Debian Bug report #248151,
regarding busybox-static: please provide some "don't fork()" option
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
248151: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=248151
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: busybox-static
Version: 1:0.60.5-2.1
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
it would be really helpful, if you'd provide some
"don't fork()" option for busybox-static.
Currently, process accounting shows, that it fork()s,
even if you call a builtin command. This denies
the use of busybox in out-of-processes-scenarios
(where you need to have it started before of course :)).
Of course, not fork()ing implies, that pipelining
and redirection won't work (at least not so easy,
if ever).
This is probably something to forward to the upstream
author(s).
regards,
Mario
--
I heard, if you play a NT-CD backwards, you get satanic messages...
That's nothing. If you play it forwards, it installs NT.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, 9 May 2004 18:01:21 +0200 "Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe"
<[email protected]> wrote:
Package: busybox-static
Version: 1:0.60.5-2.1
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
it would be really helpful, if you'd provide some
"don't fork()" option for busybox-static.
Currently, process accounting shows, that it fork()s,
even if you call a builtin command. This denies
the use of busybox in out-of-processes-scenarios
(where you need to have it started before of course :)).
Of course, not fork()ing implies, that pipelining
and redirection won't work (at least not so easy,
if ever).
This is probably something to forward to the upstream
author(s).
Hi!
This is a very old bug report, filed 22 years ago.
During this time, busybox gained nofork optimization
in quite a few places. Not every applet can be run
without forking, but many simple ones can, and it is
done.
There's no reason, I think, to keep this bug open
anymore.
Thanks,
/mjt
--- End Message ---
