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 encaps
> your are right. the question is:
> original:
> sed -ne 's![^0-9].*$!!p' /proc/uptime
> patch:
> cut -d'.' -f1 /proc/uptime
Both are equally fine with me. The IFS version you sent earlier falls
in my "ugly code" category, OTOH.
> patch-2:
> uptime_in_seconds()
> {
> cut -d'.' -f1 /pro
On 20.01.2011 13:40, John Crispin wrote:
>> > without having stomach ache, when base breaks.
> i dont get the "when base breaks" bit
he means in case the modifications (in the 'alternative' base package)
introduce a show stopping bug.
..ede
___
openwrt
On 2011-01-20 2:01 PM, Bastian Bittorf wrote:
>> > - e.g. trying to abondon ifconfig/route/arp by using ip
>>
>> i doubt that owrt will ever switch to using ip, at least not in
>> its
>> current state.
>
> but it's really a pity, that a _network_ distro uses
> an 25+ years old concept 8-). openwr
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:34, Bastian Bittorf wrote:
>> But how many space is safe if busybox is compiled without sed and
>> awk?
>
> 485.928 bytes original
> 451.976 bytes without sed+awk
I think this is not a strong possibility because a LOT of packages
will depend on sed and awk.
> - e.g. tr
> > - e.g. trying to abondon ifconfig/route/arp by using ip
>
> i doubt that owrt will ever switch to using ip, at least not in
> its
> current state.
but it's really a pity, that a _network_ distro uses
an 25+ years old concept 8-). openwrt can only use
ip, if we change a lot in base-files...
>
Hi
>>> [ ] base-files standard
>>> [ ] base-files mini (no sed/awk, experimental)
>>
>> But how many space is safe if busybox is compiled without sed and
>> awk?
>
> 485.928 bytes original
> 451.976 bytes without sed+awk
that is 5k once lzma compressed it for squashfs so the size argument can
b
> > [ ] base-files standard
> > [ ] base-files mini (no sed/awk, experimental)
>
> But how many space is safe if busybox is compiled without sed and
> awk?
485.928 bytes original
451.976 bytes without sed+awk
but thats not only the point. if we have a selectable
experimental base-files package,
2011/1/20 Bastian Bittorf :
> I will stop sending patches like this, because i see that
> many people have stomachache with these, but i propose
> for menuconfig a selection like this:
>
> [ ] base-files standard
> [ ] base-files mini (no sed/awk, experimental)
>
But how many space is safe if busy
-devel-boun...@lists.openwrt.org
[mailto:openwrt-devel-boun...@lists.openwrt.org] Im Auftrag von Bastian
Bittorf
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 19. Januar 2011 15:54
An: mailinglist
Betreff: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] base-files/hotplug: refactoring
ifup/netstate V2
it is always a bad idea to mix up different
> 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, t
On 20/01/11 10:06, Bastian Bittorf wrote:
it is always a bad idea to mix up different languages
in one environment.
>>
>> I don't accept this is a valid starting point. I agree that it is
>> useful to limit the number of tools/languages you use, but you
>> should
>> still try and use the
> >> it is always a bad idea to mix up different languages
> >> in one environment.
>
> I don't accept this is a valid starting point. I agree that it is
> useful to limit the number of tools/languages you use, but you
> should
> still try and use the right tool/language for the right job.
your
>> it is always a bad idea to mix up different languages
>> in one environment.
I don't accept this is a valid starting point. I agree that it is
useful to limit the number of tools/languages you use, but you should
still try and use the right tool/language for the right job.
>> now we use ash-b
2011/1/19 Bastian Bittorf :
>> The use of sed an awk should not be consider "a different"
>> languages
>> simple because aren't different languages but just tools like read
>
> yes, but we should use the best suiting tool,
> and this means NOT that we should use
> oneliners which are often unreadab
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 04:04:21PM +0100, Claudio wrote:
> 2011/1/19 Bastian Bittorf :
> > it is always a bad idea to mix up different languages
> > in one environment. now we use ash-builtins to get
> > uptime_in_seconds() instead of using cryptic sed-style.
> >
>
> All those "restyle" to avoid t
> The use of sed an awk should not be consider "a different"
> languages
> simple because aren't different languages but just tools like read
yes, but we should use the best suiting tool,
and this means NOT that we should use
oneliners which are often unreadable, when
looking through code...
> Mo
2011/1/19 Bastian Bittorf :
> it is always a bad idea to mix up different languages
> in one environment. now we use ash-builtins to get
> uptime_in_seconds() instead of using cryptic sed-style.
>
All those "restyle" to avoid the use of awk and sed are really useful?
I don't believe.
The use of se
it is always a bad idea to mix up different languages
in one environment. now we use ash-builtins to get
uptime_in_seconds() instead of using cryptic sed-style.
Signed-off-by: Bastian Bittorf
>From a0997188ea3a325db33f9041297ebfea0180e31f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bastian Bittorf
Date: Wed,
19 matches
Mail list logo
