Re: Removing busybox

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 03:09:02PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 09:06:38PM +0100, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
>...
> > So as expected systemd is there and busybox is not. But there is a lot of
> > useful commands missing on the resulting QEMU image:
> > 
> > root@qemux86:~# ps
> > ~sh: ps: command not found
> > root@qemux86:~# w
> > ~sh: w: command not found
> > root@qemux86:~# find
> > ~sh: find: command not found
> > root@qemux86:~# grep
> > ~sh: grep: command not found
> > root@qemux86:~# ip addr
> > ~sh: ip: command not found
> > 
> > I expected that all the limited busybox commands would be replaced by
> > the full
> > featured commands. How to fix that ?
> 
> Correct, you're missing a lot of stuff.  Somewhere on my (and other
> folks too) TODO list is a packagegroup that includes procps and psmisc
> and grep and tar and various network packages and less and more and...

"all the limited busybox commands would be replaced" would be a huge 
list from dc through gawk, minicom and wget to vim.

And would vim-tiny qualify as "the full featured command" of busybox vi,
or should this include vim with full features?

The nice thing about busybox is that it is so small,
in many cases one full featured command alone
is bigger than busybox.

It is not obvious to me what usecases people have in mind for
getting rid of busybox, and whether everyone is aware that
something like "all busybox commands replaced" is *very*
expensive regarding filesystem size.

> Tom

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed