From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 11:34:31 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/5] coreutils: belongs to system tools, not development In-Reply-To: <20131203111216.5452f30d@skate> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Tue, 3 Dec 2013 11:12:16 +0100") References: <1385981368-2235-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <87zjoipdlk.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> <20131203095920.1e46375f@skate> <8761r6p7vk.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> <20131203111216.5452f30d@skate> Message-ID: <87li02nryg.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Hi, >> E.G. if we support bash/coreutils/.., then we should really support >> them. > I definitely agree with this last part, but I don't see how "really > supporting them" conflicts with the idea of hiding them by default to > avoid having newcomers confused by these. It's mainly about when the featureset significantly differs between busybox and the "full" variant. The question if the busybox version is "good enough" unfortunately is quite system/use case dependent. -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard