> * 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.
I may add that "big user base" means for instance, that several embedded firmwares for routers like the AVM Fritz!Box series and T-Com Speedport rely on BusyBox's ash. Firmware modification projects like Freetz (http://www.freetz.org) replace the outdated BB with a current one. I never thought of ash as a bash replacement, merely as a bash predecessor which it historically is (feature-wise, too, I guess). I think Denis just wanted to point out how mighty and complex ash is. I believe making as a bit leaner and more maintainable without sacrificing functionality would be welcome to most users, but is a non-trivial task. I would recommend a test-driven approach, i.e. first write a lot of tests (or port them from coreutils as suggested) and then step by step refactor it, if you feel inclined to do that. Just my 2 cents as a non-C programmer -- Alexander Kriegisch _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
