Yes, if we can merge both in a single dd command, but keep the configuration to have a small dd (like that from nshlib) for small microcontroller as Sebastien suggested, it will be fine.
+1 On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 10:59 AM Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> wrote: > The functionality in system/dd and nshlib is unsync, this patch: > > 1. update system/dd to get the same functionality as nshlib/dd > 2. remove one copy(nshlib/dd) to avoid the inconsistency in the future. > > Good work! thanks. > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 9:07 PM 董九柱 <dongjiuzhu0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello Community, > > > > I submit some PRs about using system/dd app instead of dd command from > > nshlib. > > > > PR link: > > https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/pull/3057 > > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/16198 > > > > Why do? > > There are two implementations of dd in the current system, one under > nshlib > > and the other under system/dd. > > we need to remove one to avoid duplication code and function lost. The > > discuss: https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/pull/3048 > > From the current perspective, the system "dd" is a better choice, as it > > allows for the separate configuration of its corresponding stack and > > compilation into an independent wasm module. > > > > How do? > > 1. Align the functionality of "dd" in nshlib with that in the system "dd" > > to ensure consistent functionality. > > 2. Remove implement of dd in nshlib, include > > config(CONFIG_NSH_DISABLE_DD、NSH_CMDOPT_DD_STATS) and > > file(nshlib/nsh_ddcmd.c) > > 3. Adjust all board configurations to ensure backward and forward > > compatibility. > > > > So I need your vote here: > > If you accept the breaking PR, please reply with +1. > > If you reject the PR, please reply with -1. > > > > BRs, > > >
