| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
(add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 12/131 up/down: 91/-727) Total: -636 bytes
text data bss dec hex filename
773469 1058 11092 785619 bfcd3 busybox_old
772644 1058 11092 784794 bf99a busybox_unstripped
|
|
|
|
|
|
(patch by Yuichi Nakamura <ynakam@hitachisoft.jp>)
runcon: *yet another* fix for vda's brainfart :(
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add doc on POSIX's rules on -i and -f (insane!).
ln: make "ln dangling_symlink new_link" work.
|
|
|
|
It is impossible to formulate sane ABI based on
size of ulong because it can be 32-bit or 64-bit.
Basically it means that you cannot portably use
more that 32 option chars in one call anyway...
Make it explicit.
|
|
|
|
mailing list
|
|
|
|
version of make (3.71.1).
|
|
definitions. (That should only be on prototypes.)
|
|
Fixes make trying to include the very same file in an endless loop.
|
|
- use less resources for the buildsystem itself
|
|
|
|
|
|
- IMA compilation option (aka IPO, IPA,..)
Please holler if i broke something..
|
|
* coreutils.h: remove prototype of non-existing xgetoptfile_sort_uniq
and add boilerplate.
* networking/{ipaddr,ip,iplink,iproute,iptunnel}.c: touch includes
and use short boilerplate.
* libiproute/iproute.c: rename round to avoid clashes with older
SuSE gcc and use short boilerplate.
|
|
|
|
This fixes the warning, and makes the binary smaller out of sheer pique.
(Yes, since Manuel did this one it's nice tight code that took several
attempts to shrink, but I was ticked.)
Add the start of a test for uniq; this is about the first 1/3 of the
tests we need for full susv3 coverage of uniq.
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I've created a patch to busybox' build system to allow building it in
separate tree in a manner similar to kbuild from kernel version 2.6.
That is, one runs command like
'make O=/build/some/where/for/specific/target/and/options'
and everything is built in this exact directory, provided that it exists.
I understand that applyingc such invasive changes during 'release
candidates' stage of development is at best unwise. So, i'm currently
asking for comments about this patch, starting from whether such thing
is needed at all to whether it coded properly.
'make check' should work now, and one make creates Makefile in build
directory, so one can run 'make' in build directory after that.
One possible caveat is that if we build in some directory other than
source one, the source directory should be 'distclean'ed first.
egor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
