Dear Sean, In message <7143cb1e-4061-3034-57b9-1a12753fa...@gmail.com> you wrote: > > > > You complain that the existing port of hus has a number of severe > > limitations or bugs which have long been fixed upstream, > > The bugs are fairly minor. The particular characteristics of Hush have > not changed. These characteristics make Hush difficult to adapt to the > limitations of U-Boot. When we cannot support the basic abstractions > expected by Hush, the shell will necessarily change for the worse.
This is not true. Just have a look what hush in a recent version of Busybox offers. > > but cannot be easily fixed in U-Boot > > Because they are core to the design of Hush (and other bourne derived > shells). Oh, this is an interesting opinion. I doubt if a majority (or even a significant percentage) of U-Boot users share it. If you were right, there would be far less users of bash (or other "bourne derived shells"). Guess which percentage of users of UNIX operating systems is using a Tcl based command interpreter as their login shell? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de "There are three principal ways to lose money: wine, women, and engi- neers. While the first two are more pleasant, the third is by far the more certain." - Baron Rothschild, ca. 1800
