I don't think, that having two base-files packages is the right way. Maintaining is too expensive, just for the same stuff.
I like the idea to modularize functional expressions. There are some lines of code (specially regEx), which are definitely only readable by a professional. If this is encapsulated by a function with a speaking name, this would be a benefit. All in all, we have the problem, that there is no concept in writing (base-file) scripts for openwrt. Specially when You try to write some hardware specific scripts, there are no guidelines for syntax (using if .. ; then statements or better '[ .. ] && [ .. ] || [ .. ]') or modularization. Look at debian or other distros, they have a codeing-style. Every scripter in target specific dirs do their own things. By the way, a framework for handling led control while pre-/init state is missing, too and there a hundreds of solutions let leds blink. To summarize, we should define some scripting guidelines and use them for all targets. Discussing pro and cons of sed and awk is lame. If this increases the use of lowmem-boards, it's a progress at all. Greets Michael >> if >> you, in 1, 6, 12 months, still forward port all the changes and >> fixes >> done in base-files to base-files-mini ?! > > of course i can maintain my "private" branch > personally, but I really think I'am not alone. > If we have it in openwrt-git, everybody can use the code. > > If we really recognize, that the package is bad > maintained, then: just remove it. I'am sure, that > it is easy to maintain, because there are not much > changes in this package in the past. > >> included (see hostapd and hostapd-mini). so calling in >> basefile-shell_only would be more applicable, although the purpose > > ok, i'am fine with this name. > purpose can be: clean_code and lowmem-boards. > > bye, Bastian. _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
