maemo.org - Talk

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)
-   Applications (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=41)
-   -   busy box replacement (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=72438)

oneat 2011-04-23 08:06

busy box replacement
 
This busybox is horrible. Every program built-in is low quality and fails in majority of functions. Do you know some type of replacement for it like normal linux shell or isn't there better idea to just replace all these subprograms?

Radicalz38 2011-04-23 09:07

Re: busy box replacement
 
bash4? 0.o

Hurrian 2011-04-23 10:17

Re: busy box replacement
 
install bash4, touch /bin/bash, symlink /bin/bash to /bin/bash4, install coreutils-gnu. setup aliases to use the g{PROGRAM_NAME_HERE} instead of the built-in busybox utils.

phedders 2011-04-23 22:16

Re: busy box replacement
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by oneat (Post 994033)
This busybox is horrible. Every program built-in is low quality and fails in majority of functions. Do you know some type of replacement for it like normal linux shell or isn't there better idea to just replace all these subprograms?

I totally disagree. Busybox is very high quality software.

What I would agree with is that it is infuriatingly limited for interactive shells... especially when you are used to bash and the full GNU suite. But be clear - that is not because of poor quality, only it is natural because Busybox is written with very different design constraints and goals - and for what it is intended to do - its brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.

(Sorry my FUD alarm just threw a wobbly!)

oneat 2011-04-26 20:15

Re: busy box replacement
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by phedders (Post 994308)
I totally disagree. Busybox is very high quality software.

What I would agree with is that it is infuriatingly limited for interactive shells... especially when you are used to bash and the full GNU suite. But be clear - that is not because of poor quality, only it is natural because Busybox is written with very different design constraints and goals - and for what it is intended to do - its brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.

(Sorry my FUD alarm just threw a wobbly!)

I didn't mean that busybox is low quality. I meant that built-in apps like grep etc got lower functionality than their cousins in standard linux bash.

J4ZZ 2011-05-05 10:59

Re: busy box replacement
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hurrian (Post 994069)
setup aliases to use the g{PROGRAM_NAME_HERE} instead of the built-in busybox utils.

Hi there, could someone please help with setting up the aliases. I'm not really sure where to put bashrc .. (there is no profile.d folder in /etc)
I tried the existend profiled folder but I couldn't see any differences in bash terminal. I tried only some custom color settings so far.

Thx in advance,

..::J4ZZ::..

Gill T 2011-05-05 11:47

Re: busy box replacement
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by oneat (Post 994033)
This busybox is horrible. Every program built-in is low quality and fails in majority of functions. Do you know some type of replacement for it like normal linux shell or isn't there better idea to just replace all these subprograms?

Maybe you are looking fore something like in this thread http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=71987&page=3
surge for the post of iDont #26


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:40.

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8