> Le 7 janv. 2023 à 22:41, Robert Marko <robima...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 at 16:26, Thibaut VARÈNE <vare...@zigoo.net> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Le 7 janv. 2023 à 15:06, Christian Marangi <ansuels...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 11:49:44PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: >>>> I need to express a per-target dependency on the 'base64' utility, and >>>> that's seemingly impossible to do for busybox. Pull in coreutils to make >>>> that easier. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpe...@gmail.com> >>> >>> We still need to think of a correct solution for this... coreutils is an >>> option but wonder if a better one is openssl... Actually we have a small >>> tool to handle specific decryption of some stuff... Wonder if that can >>> be expanded for this task and just use wolfssl or openssl api to decode >>> base64 stuff? >> >> Using one or the other would impose (i.e. (en)force) that SSL library on >> this particular target. Do we want this, especially considering the ongoing >> conversation about mbedTLS? >> >> Also pulling an entire SSL implementation just to decode base64 seems a tad >> overkill too. > > I agree on this one, forcing usage of OpenSSL isn't ideal, coreutils > is a better option for sure.
There might be an even easier/lighter way (short of enabling base64 in busybox), AWK to the rescue: https://github.com/shane-kerr/AWK-base64decode The code is clean and judging by the comment line 97, works with busybox awk. HTH T _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
