mirror of
https://github.com/sheumann/hush.git
synced 2024-06-26 17:29:42 +00:00
First quick stab at organizing TODO under whose TODO item it is.
This commit is contained in:
Rob Landley
parent
80b8ff07ca
commit
df4cdaf341
199
TODO
199
TODO
|
|
@ -1,28 +1,111 @@
|
|||
Busybox TODO
|
||||
|
||||
Stuff that needs to be done. All of this is fair game for 1.2.
|
||||
Stuff that needs to be done. This is organized by who plans to get around to
|
||||
doing it eventually, but that doesn't mean they "own" the item. If you want to
|
||||
do one of these bounce an email off the person it's listed under to see if they
|
||||
have any suggestions how they plan to go about it, and to minimize conflicts
|
||||
between your work and theirs. But otherwise, all of these are fair game.
|
||||
|
||||
Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>:
|
||||
Migrate calloc() and bb_calloc() occurrences to bb_xzalloc().
|
||||
Remove obsolete _() wrapper crud for internationalization we don't do.
|
||||
Figure out where we need utf8 support, and add it.
|
||||
|
||||
sh
|
||||
The command shell situation is a big mess. We have three or four different
|
||||
shells that don't really share any code, and the "standalone shell" doesn't
|
||||
work all that well (especially not in a chroot environment), due to apps not
|
||||
being reentrant. I'm writing a new shell (bbsh) to unify the various
|
||||
shells and configurably add the minimal set of bash features people
|
||||
actually use. The hardest part is it has to configure down as small as
|
||||
lash while providing lash's features. The rest is easy in comparison.
|
||||
bzip2
|
||||
Compression-side support.
|
||||
init
|
||||
General cleanup.
|
||||
Unify base64 handling.
|
||||
There's base64 encoding and decoding going on in:
|
||||
networking/wget.c:base64enc()
|
||||
coreutils/uudecode.c:read_base64()
|
||||
coreutils/uuencode.c:tbl_base64[]
|
||||
networking/httpd.c:decodeBase64()
|
||||
And probably elsewhere. That needs to be unified into libbb functions.
|
||||
Do a SUSv3 audit
|
||||
Look at the full Single Unix Specification version 3 (available online at
|
||||
"http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/nfindex.html") and
|
||||
figure out which of our apps are compliant, and what we're missing that
|
||||
we might actually care about.
|
||||
|
||||
Even better would be some kind of automated compliance test harness that
|
||||
exercises each command line option and the various corner cases.
|
||||
Internationalization
|
||||
How much internationalization should we do?
|
||||
|
||||
The low hanging fruit is UTF-8 character set support. We should do this.
|
||||
(Vodz pointed out the shell's cmdedit as needing work here. What else?)
|
||||
|
||||
We also have lots of hardwired english text messages. Consolidating this
|
||||
into some kind of message table not only makes translation easier, but
|
||||
also allows us to consolidate redundant (or close) strings.
|
||||
|
||||
We probably don't want to be bloated with locale support. (Not unless we
|
||||
can cleanly export it from our underlying C library without having to
|
||||
concern ourselves with it directly. Perhaps a few specific things like a
|
||||
config option for "date" are low hanging fruit here?)
|
||||
|
||||
What level should things happen at? How much do we care about
|
||||
internationalizing the text console when X11 and xterms are so much better
|
||||
at it? (There's some infrastructure here we don't implement: The
|
||||
"unicode_start" and "unicode_stop" shell scripts need "vt-is-UTF8" and a
|
||||
--unicode option to loadkeys. That implies a real loadkeys/dumpkeys
|
||||
implementation to replace loadkmap/dumpkmap. Plus messing with console font
|
||||
loading. Is it worth it, or do we just say "use X"?)
|
||||
|
||||
Individual compilation of applets.
|
||||
It would be nice if busybox had the option to compile to individual applets,
|
||||
for people who want an alternate implementation less bloated than the gnu
|
||||
utils (or simply with less political baggage), but without it being one big
|
||||
executable.
|
||||
|
||||
Turning libbb into a real dll is another possibility, especially if libbb
|
||||
could export some of the other library interfaces we've already more or less
|
||||
got the code for (like zlib).
|
||||
buildroot - Make a "dogfood" option
|
||||
Busybox 1.1 will be capable of replacing most gnu packages for real world
|
||||
use, such as developing software or in a live CD. It needs wider testing.
|
||||
|
||||
Busybox should now be able to replace bzip2, coreutils, e2fsprogs, file,
|
||||
findutils, gawk, grep, inetutils, less, modutils, net-tools, patch, procps,
|
||||
sed, shadow, sysklogd, sysvinit, tar, util-linux, and vim. The resulting
|
||||
system should be self-hosting (I.E. able to rebuild itself from source
|
||||
code). This means it would need (at least) binutils, gcc, and make, or
|
||||
equivalents.
|
||||
|
||||
It would be a good "eating our own dogfood" test if buildroot had the option
|
||||
of using a "make allyesconfig" busybox instead of the all of the above
|
||||
packages. Anything that's wrong with the resulting system, we can fix. (It
|
||||
would be nice to be able to upgrade busybox to be able to replace bash and
|
||||
diffutils as well, but we're not there yet.)
|
||||
|
||||
One example of an existing system that does this already is Firmware Linux:
|
||||
http://www.landley.net/code/firmware
|
||||
initramfs
|
||||
Busybox should have a sample initramfs build script. This depends on
|
||||
bbsh, mdev, and switch_root.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Bernhard Fischer <rep.nop@anon.at>:
|
||||
Makefile stuff:
|
||||
make -j is broken, -j1 is forced atm
|
||||
|
||||
As yet unclaimed:
|
||||
|
||||
build system
|
||||
make -j is broken, -j1 is forced atm
|
||||
Make sure that the flags get pinned in e.g. Rules.mak so when expanding them
|
||||
later on you get the cached result without the need to re-evaluate them.
|
||||
----
|
||||
find
|
||||
doesn't understand (), lots of susv3 stuff.
|
||||
----
|
||||
sh
|
||||
The command shell situation is a big mess. We have three or four different
|
||||
shells that don't really share any code, and the "standalone shell" doesn't
|
||||
work all that well (especially not in a chroot environment), due to apps not
|
||||
being reentrant. Unifying the various shells and figuring out a configurable
|
||||
way of adding the minimal set of bash features a given script uses is a big
|
||||
job, but it would be a big improvement.
|
||||
|
||||
Note: Rob Landley (rob@landley.net) is working on a new unified shell called
|
||||
bbsh, but it's a low priority...
|
||||
---
|
||||
diff
|
||||
Also, make sure we handle empty files properly:
|
||||
Make sure we handle empty files properly:
|
||||
From the patch man page:
|
||||
|
||||
you can remove a file by sending out a context diff that compares
|
||||
|
|
@ -45,18 +128,9 @@ man
|
|||
|
||||
(How doclifter might work into this is anybody's guess.)
|
||||
---
|
||||
bzip2
|
||||
Compression-side support.
|
||||
---
|
||||
init
|
||||
General cleanup.
|
||||
---
|
||||
ar
|
||||
Write support?
|
||||
---
|
||||
mdev
|
||||
Micro-udev.
|
||||
---
|
||||
crond
|
||||
turn FEATURE_DEBUG_OPT into ENABLE_FEATURE_CROND_DEBUG_OPT
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -74,46 +148,6 @@ bb_close() with fsync()
|
|||
You need to call fsync() if you care about errors that occur after write(),
|
||||
but that can have a big performance impact. So make it a config option.
|
||||
---
|
||||
Unify base64 handling.
|
||||
There's base64 encoding and decoding going on in:
|
||||
networking/wget.c:base64enc()
|
||||
coreutils/uudecode.c:read_base64()
|
||||
coreutils/uuencode.c:tbl_base64[]
|
||||
networking/httpd.c:decodeBase64()
|
||||
And probably elsewhere. That needs to be unified into libbb functions.
|
||||
---
|
||||
Do a SUSv3 audit
|
||||
Look at the full Single Unix Specification version 3 (available online at
|
||||
"http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/nfindex.html") and
|
||||
figure out which of our apps are compliant, and what we're missing that
|
||||
we might actually care about.
|
||||
|
||||
Even better would be some kind of automated compliance test harness that
|
||||
exercises each command line option and the various corner cases.
|
||||
---
|
||||
Internationalization
|
||||
How much internationalization should we do?
|
||||
|
||||
The low hanging fruit is UTF-8 character set support. We should do this.
|
||||
(Vodz pointed out the shell's cmdedit as needing work here. What else?)
|
||||
|
||||
We also have lots of hardwired english text messages. Consolidating this
|
||||
into some kind of message table not only makes translation easier, but
|
||||
also allows us to consolidate redundant (or close) strings.
|
||||
|
||||
We probably don't want to be bloated with locale support. (Not unless we can
|
||||
cleanly export it from our underlying C library without having to concern
|
||||
ourselves with it directly. Perhaps a few specific things like a config
|
||||
option for "date" are low hanging fruit here?)
|
||||
|
||||
What level should things happen at? How much do we care about
|
||||
internationalizing the text console when X11 and xterms are so much better
|
||||
at it? (There's some infrastructure here we don't implement: The
|
||||
"unicode_start" and "unicode_stop" shell scripts need "vt-is-UTF8" and a
|
||||
--unicode option to loadkeys. That implies a real loadkeys/dumpkeys
|
||||
implementation to replace loadkmap/dumpkmap. Plus messing with console font
|
||||
loading. Is it worth it, or do we just say "use X"?)
|
||||
---
|
||||
Unify archivers
|
||||
Lots of archivers have the same general infrastructure. The directory
|
||||
traversal code should be factored out, and the guts of each archiver could
|
||||
|
|
@ -129,39 +163,6 @@ Text buffer support.
|
|||
a whole file into memory and act on it. There might be an opportunity
|
||||
for shared code in there that could be moved into libbb...
|
||||
---
|
||||
Individual compilation of applets.
|
||||
It would be nice if busybox had the option to compile to individual applets,
|
||||
for people who want an alternate implementation less bloated than the gnu
|
||||
utils (or simply with less political baggage), but without it being one big
|
||||
executable.
|
||||
|
||||
Turning libbb into a real dll is another possibility, especially if libbb
|
||||
could export some of the other library interfaces we've already more or less
|
||||
got the code for (like zlib).
|
||||
---
|
||||
buildroot - Make a "dogfood" option
|
||||
Busybox 1.1 will be capable of replacing most gnu packages for real world use,
|
||||
such as developing software or in a live CD. It needs wider testing.
|
||||
|
||||
Busybox should now be able to replace bzip2, coreutils, e2fsprogs, file,
|
||||
findutils, gawk, grep, inetutils, less, modutils, net-tools, patch, procps,
|
||||
sed, shadow, sysklogd, sysvinit, tar, util-linux, and vim. The resulting
|
||||
system should be self-hosting (I.E. able to rebuild itself from source code).
|
||||
This means it would need (at least) binutils, gcc, and make, or equivalents.
|
||||
|
||||
It would be a good "eating our own dogfood" test if buildroot had the option
|
||||
of using a "make allyesconfig" busybox instead of the all of the above
|
||||
packages. Anything that's wrong with the resulting system, we can fix. (It
|
||||
would be nice to be able to upgrade busybox to be able to replace bash and
|
||||
diffutils as well, but we're not there yet.)
|
||||
|
||||
One example of an existing system that does this already is Firmware Linux:
|
||||
http://www.landley.net/code/firmware
|
||||
---
|
||||
initramfs
|
||||
Busybox should have a sample initramfs build script. This depends on
|
||||
bbsh, mdev, and switch_root.
|
||||
---
|
||||
Memory Allocation
|
||||
We have a CONFIG_BUFFER mechanism that lets us select whether to do memory
|
||||
allocation on the stack or the heap. Unfortunately, we're not using it much.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user