On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Russell Coker wrote: > On Sunday 31 December 2006 20:33, maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: <snipp> > Such things of course will be less likely to be found if there is no easy > option of creating an initramfs that uses it. The last patch that I sent > will give no different result unless you set ONLY_BUSYBOX=y, so I can't > imagine it causing any problems for anyone. > > The sleep bug is reported as below: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=341403 > > Having this code in mkinitramfs makes it more likely that the busybox bugs > will get fixed.
ok! as you agree that the busybox utitilites are not functional ident, i queue that patch for postetch. there should be enough time to poke new busybox upstream to merge such patches. happy new year. -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]