[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    Re: [PATCH 1/3] Support both custom scripts and scripted applets
From:       Ron Yorston <rmy () pobox ! com>
Date:       2018-11-17 10:32:01
Message-ID: 5befee21.pZ3Iu0dCPwbgTVys%rmy () pobox ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Kang-Che Sung wrote:
>However, I'm still in the position that BusyBox shouldn't be a supplier of
>scripted applets (as I said, that would complicate the configuration too much).
>If you downstream are okay to deploy scripted applets, then go ahead. I just
>don't wish dependency hell that's essentially bikeshedding (i.e. script applets
>too trivial to implement) to come up here.

Scripted applets provided by BusyBox will have been subject to review
on this list and by the maintainers.  We can trust Denys not to accept
substandard scripts just as he does with native code.

>For the 'scripted applets' use case, you provide Kbuild and Config files just
>like other applets, except they just happen to reside in embed directory.

Sounds like what Denys was proposing.  To me it seems simpler to keep
the different types of script in different directories.  I don't see
any advantage in putting them all in the same place.

>For custom scripts, require at least a "list file" to indicate which should be
>built and embedded into the binary, and also in what order they would present
>in the 'busybox --help' output (they need not be in alphabetical order).
>
>Scripts in the embed directory but without any _directive_ on how they should
>be built would be ignored.

The developer controls what they put in the embed directory.  The presence
(or non-presence) of a script is sufficient to specify whether (or not)
it should be embedded.  I don't see the need for a list.

Ron
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]