Bruno Jargot wrote:
> On 3/7/07, Garrett D'Amore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Bruno Jargot wrote:
> > > How does BusyBox helps you to reduce the size of the current
> > > footprint? Its an All-in-One solution where lots of code gets shared
> > > between commands. And a ksh93-based BusyBox requires even less
> > > footprint because ksh93 uses less memory than bash.
> >
> > Huh.  BusyBox is orthogonal to bash.  It doesn't use bash at all, IIRC,
> > but "ash" or some other "limited" shell.
> 
> Huh? I think its a stripped down bash. The shell in BusyBox has all
> the bash features, including high memory consumption.

The busybox(1) manual page says it's "ash" based (using "bash" for this
purpose would be a huge problem since it consumes far too much
memory...) ...

----

Bye,
Roland

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  \__\/\/__/  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
  /O /==\ O\  TEL +49 641 7950090
 (;O/ \/ \O;)
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code

Reply via email to