On Saturday 16 February 2008 16:29, Benjamin Kiener wrote: > Hi, everybody. > > As I read in the TODO, the situation of keeping several shells is > undesireable for some users and developers of busybox, so I'd like to help > to change that. Can anyone (Rob?) give me a more concret summary,
The summary is: * ash is in "bash replacement" class. It's big and complex. Need to fix bugs and maybe even add a few more bashisms. No wild hacking on it - it's too big and too complex, and too important. * msh is a NOMMU workhorse. Has some known bugs (see bug database at busybox.net). Needs testcases. Smaller code and smaller userbase than ash. * hush is the smallest and "youngest" shell, recently become NOMMU capable. Has small userbase -> easier to hack on it without risking user base alienation. * lash is dead (yay!) ash and hush have testsuites (see shell/ash_test and shell/hush_test), msh does not (would be nice to have one). Any changes to ash and hush MUST NOT break testsuite. They are not random applets, they are shells. People depend on them a lot. If you fix a bug in a shell, please do add a testsuite entry for it. If you add/fix a feature, try to make it SUSv3 compliant. Docs are in shells/ dir. If you want to go beyond that, make the feature bash-compatible. -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
