busybox compile error form ARM core???

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 03:42:00PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
>On Tuesday 30 May 2006 1:45 pm, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
>> On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 10:01:50AM +0200, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
>> >On Tue, 30 May 2006, Rob Landley wrote:
>> >> On Tuesday 30 May 2006 2:20 am, yangm wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>   if (!(opt & 2)) {
>> >> #if defined(__uClinux__)
>> >
>> >for uClibc-svn non-MMU the condition to use the internal version would be
>> >
>> >#if defined __UCLIBC__ && !defined __ARCH_USE_MMU__
>> >
>> >Peter
>> >
>> >>     /* reexec for vfork() do continue parent */
>> >>     vfork_daemon_rexec (0, 0, argc, argv, "-f");
>> >> #else
>> >>     daemon (0, 0); /* bb_xdaemon? */
>> >> #endif /* uClinux */
>> >>   } else {
>>
>> Landley, what do you think?
>>
>> in platform.h,
>> /* uclibc does not implement daemon for no-mmu systems. */
>> #if defined __UCLIBC__ && !defined __ARCH_USE_MMU__
>> #define BB_DAEMON(no_chdir, no_close, argc, argv, str) \
>> 	vfork_daemon_rexec(no_chdir, no_close, argc, argv, str)
>> #else
>> #define BB_DAEMON(no_chdir, no_close, argc, argv, str) \
>> 	daemon(no_chdir, no_close)
>> #endif
>>
>> Alternatively, we can of course introduce an int bb_daemon(d,c,ac,av,s){}
>> to libbb which does the same (may be bigger than the proposal above, didn't
>> try).
>
>Actually, what I'd like is a bb_daemon(a, b) that (for the BB_NOMMU case) uses 
>approximately the same mechanism as the standalone shell when it needs to 
>exec stuff.  Our argc and argv should be made available as globals so this 
>thing can access them.

A suggestion which did this is here:
http://busybox.net/lists/busybox/2006-July/022882.html

It doesn't look too nice to me, size-wise.. Thoughts?
>
>Speaking of which, we still need a config entry that lets people change the 
>standalone shell's default "/proc/self/exe" to point to wherever their copy 
>of busybox is installed if they don't have /proc.  Break that out into some 
>kind of bb_exec_self(argc, argv) or some such.

By now this is in the tree already.
>
>These are both existing todo items of mine, but if somebody else wanted to 
>take a stab at it first...