Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] patch to enable building of uuencode applet for busybox
On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 19:57 -0400, i iordanov wrote: Hi Philip, On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Philip Prindeville philipp_s...@redfish-solutions.com wrote: Why is voicemail encoding using uuencode and not base64??? Well, it can be either. I use uuencode with the -m option which makes it output base64 encoding: -m, --base64use base64 encoding as of RFC1521 If you prefer base64 instead of uuencode, I could alter the script which crafts the email with the voicemail attachment to use base64 and provide a patch to enable the base64 applet to be built by default instead of uuencode. Please advise. If you are willing to adjust the script, can I suggest you convert it to lua. It's not a very large script and you can then use the nixio.bin.b64encode() function. Also you can tidy up the uci access using the lua uci library. http://luci.subsignal.org/api/nixio/modules/nixio.bin.html I thought that the uuencode option on busybox was not exposed, but it is a config variable. There should be some suitable syntax you can use in your package makefile to enable it? I am only familiar with the dependency option, but that is for a whole package. Conor ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] patch to enable building of uuencode applet for busybox
On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 10:19 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: I thought that the uuencode option on busybox was not exposed, but it is a config variable. There should be some suitable syntax you can use in your package makefile to enable it? I am only familiar with the dependency option, but that is for a whole package. That is, of course, no use if you want your package to be installed onto an existing system. Sorry. Conor ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] patch to enable building of uuencode applet for busybox
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Conor O'Gorman i...@conorogorman.net wrote: If you are willing to adjust the script, can I suggest you convert it to lua. It's not a very large script and you can then use the nixio.bin.b64encode() function. Also you can tidy up the uci access using the lua uci library. I think it's better if this script remains a shell script, as it calls a bunch of other programs installed on the system to get the job done - it is not really a standalone program. As far as lua is concerned, I could, instead of using uuencode, perhaps write a separate lua script which will do just the base64 encoding for me using the nixio library. http://luci.subsignal.org/api/nixio/modules/nixio.bin.html I thought that the uuencode option on busybox was not exposed, but it is a config variable. There should be some suitable syntax you can use in your package makefile to enable it? I am only familiar with the dependency option, but that is for a whole package. Yes, I also figured the dependency option is for a whole package. Is there a general opposition to enabling either base64 or uuencode in busybox? Won't it be of use to anybody else? I thought I saw somebody on the forum talking about compiling uuencode as a separate package because he needed it. Cheers, Iordan ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
[OpenWrt-Devel] patch to enable building of uuencode applet for busybox
Hello, The package luci-app-pbx-voicemail needs uuencode which is unavailable in busybox. I need it in order to encode binary attachments (voicemail) to send by email. Including uuencode will naturally enable OpenWRT machines to send binary email attachments of other kinds as well. Enabling uuencode increases the size of busybox only slightly. Here is the difference: 1) Busybox with uuencode disabled: Sizes reported by ls -l and du -s /bin/busybox respectively: 428527 419 /bin/busybox 2) Busybox with uuencode enabled: Sizes reported by ls -l and du -s /bin/busybox respectively: 429327 420 /bin/busybox This is less than 1kb difference. Do you think that we can enable the building of uuencode by default? I am including a patch (created with svn diff in the root directory of the SVN repository) which is probably not the correct format, and this is why I need your input to tell me how to format it correctly for submission as an enhancement. Also, any input on whether it will be accepted is very welcome. Many thanks, Iordan -- The conscious mind has only one thread of execution. Index: package/busybox/config/coreutils/Config.in === --- package/busybox/config/coreutils/Config.in (revision 30964) +++ package/busybox/config/coreutils/Config.in (working copy) @@ -831,7 +831,7 @@ config BUSYBOX_CONFIG_UUENCODE bool uuencode - default n + default y help uuencode is used to uuencode a file. ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] patch to enable building of uuencode applet for busybox
Why is voicemail encoding using uuencode and not base64??? On 3/18/12 3:23 PM, i iordanov wrote: Hello, The package luci-app-pbx-voicemail needs uuencode which is unavailable in busybox. I need it in order to encode binary attachments (voicemail) to send by email. Including uuencode will naturally enable OpenWRT machines to send binary email attachments of other kinds as well. Enabling uuencode increases the size of busybox only slightly. Here is the difference: 1) Busybox with uuencode disabled: Sizes reported by ls -l and du -s /bin/busybox respectively: 428527 419 /bin/busybox 2) Busybox with uuencode enabled: Sizes reported by ls -l and du -s /bin/busybox respectively: 429327 420 /bin/busybox This is less than 1kb difference. Do you think that we can enable the building of uuencode by default? I am including a patch (created with svn diff in the root directory of the SVN repository) which is probably not the correct format, and this is why I need your input to tell me how to format it correctly for submission as an enhancement. Also, any input on whether it will be accepted is very welcome. Many thanks, Iordan ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
