Re: [PATCH] dd: implement status=noxfer and status=none

2014-10-31 Thread Ari Sundholm
This patch (or an equivalent) is required to run some of the tests in xfstests on busybox. I would really like to see this merged if it is acceptable. On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 16:55 +0300, Ari Sundholm wrote: > This patch is still waiting for comments and review. > > On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 11:33 +030

Re: [PATCH] dd: implement status=noxfer and status=none

2014-10-31 Thread Steven Honeyman
On 31 October 2014 14:56, Ari Sundholm wrote: > This patch (or an equivalent) is required to run some of the tests in > xfstests on busybox. I would really like to see this merged if it is > acceptable. > > On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 16:55 +0300, Ari Sundholm wrote: >> This patch is still waiting for c

Re: `busyboxvi` is not working like before

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Laurent Bercot wrote: > Le 19/10/2014 15:22, walter harms a écrit : >> >> I would vote for a busybox-next (or what you call it). >> A branch that easly fold back into the main but contains all >> the recent patches. > > > That may be desirable indeed. > However,

Re: `busyboxvi` is not working like before

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot wrote: >> Why? If Denis does not have time for the project, then we cannot >> really blame him. On the other hand, if a fork could work better with >> someone standing up, why not? > > > Forking a project divides resources and weakens both children.

Re: Deluser: deleting the home folder

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
Guys, what is going on ?? On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote: > Indeed, thanks, and sorry. ^^ > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: >> >> Laszlo, >> >> I think you meant the other Denys, the one with RedHat that maintains >> busybox. >> I'm with Texas Instru

Re: [RFC] malloced getpw/grxxx functions for bb

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
Sad to see your monologue. :-( For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As far as I can see it is a very serious hazard in busybox that you are trying to address following my initial email. On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 2:24 PM, tito wrote:

Re: Fix the addgroup help output

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
Isaac, I honestly took my time to address your concerns, but I have never received any feedback. Please ... ? Cheers, L. On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Isaac Dunham wrote: >>> On Mon

Re: [PATCH v2] Ntpd config file support

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
How about ... for instance merging this thing ... ? On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Isaac Dunham wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 03:06:08PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote: >> On Saturday 22 March 2014 23:46, Isaac Dunham wrote: >> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 08:40:48PM +0100, Harald Becker wrote: >>

Re: `busyboxvi` is not working like before

2014-10-31 Thread Laurent Bercot
Why? If Denis does not have time for the project, then we cannot really blame him. On the other hand, if a fork could work better with someone standing up, why not? Forking a project divides resources and weakens both children. It is a possibility for big projects with lots of resources and sev

Re: `busyboxvi` is not working like before

2014-10-31 Thread John Spencer
Laszlo Papp wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot wrote: But when the problem is finding a maintainer with enough time, expertise and willingness to maintain a project, forking is definitely not a solution - on the contrary, it would only exacerbate the problem. You were strugg

Re: `busyboxvi` is not working like before

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:52 PM, John Spencer wrote: > Laszlo Papp wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot >> wrote: >>> >>> But when the problem is finding a maintainer with >>> enough time, expertise and willingness to maintain a project, forking is >>> definitely not a sol

Re: [RFC] malloced getpw/grxxx functions for bb

2014-10-31 Thread tito
On Friday 31 October 2014 19:40:56 you wrote: > Sad to see your monologue. :-( > > For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a > feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As far as I can see it is a > very serious hazard in busybox that you are trying to address > following my init

Re: [RFC] malloced getpw/grxxx functions for bb

2014-10-31 Thread Laszlo Papp
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:13 PM, tito wrote: > On Friday 31 October 2014 19:40:56 you wrote: >> Sad to see your monologue. :-( >> >> For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a >> feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As far as I can see it is a >> very serious hazard in busybo

Re: [PATCH 3/3] zcip: add an option to force logging to syslog even if running -f

2014-10-31 Thread Xabier Oneca -- xOneca
El 30/10/2014 16:30, "Isaac Dunham" escribió: > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:15:13PM +0100, Stam, Michel [FINT] wrote: > > Hello Denys, > > > > I'm not sure what you mean with every daemon? > > > > In this particular case, I did not see much from zcip, as it was being executed from OpenWRT procd.

Re: `busyboxvi` is not working like before

2014-10-31 Thread tito
On Friday 31 October 2014 19:28:50 Laszlo Papp wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot > wrote: > >> Why? If Denis does not have time for the project, then we cannot > >> really blame him. On the other hand, if a fork could work better with > >> someone standing up, why not? > > >

Re: [RFC] malloced getpw/grxxx functions for bb

2014-10-31 Thread tito
On Friday 31 October 2014 21:16:36 you wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:13 PM, tito wrote: > > On Friday 31 October 2014 19:40:56 you wrote: > >> Sad to see your monologue. :-( > >> > >> For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a > >> feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As