busybox current status

[Jason Schoon]

On 11/29/06, Paul Fox <pgf at brightstareng.com> wrote:
>
> > >* New applets: hose/faucet? ssh[d]? :)
> >
> > If you add ssh[d], then we could as well add gcc et al ;)
>
> do we really think that busybox'ing dropbear would make it that
> much smaller?


I'll chime in with a resounding "no".  Not only do I think a significant
size benefit will be realized, I think we are then in a synchronization
nightmare.

Matt already has a nicely setup multi-call binary application that replaces
other currently larger implementations (such as opensshd).  I think we
should let him continue to do that, not move it into Busybox.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/busybox/attachments/20061129/d5daa47e/attachment.html