Apps :: Busybox

I'm so new I don't even know if this is in the right sub-forum. Someone told me that DSL uses Busybox as opposed to Bash. I read on past post's that it did and I wanted to make sure that it still uses Busybox; which would explain why some commands from my new Bash book don't work. I'll make this easy.

yes-means we still use Busybox

no-means we now use Bash or something else.

thankyou

Sorry, but we can't answer with "yes" or "no" if you are going to interpret it that way. Bash and Busybox are unrelated. Bash is a command shell, which is necessary in any nix system. DSL includes bash, ash, and ....uh...something else.

Busybox is a program that is used to replace some of the standard nix tools with a smaller package. DSL also has Busybox.

There is no "Busybox as opposed to Bash", since they are two separate tools that provide two separate functions.

ROFL....and to think I thought I was getting somewhere. WOW.

OK, nevermind, for now. I can't even ask an intelligent question in response to your response. LOL...

Thanks for the response, though.

Perhaps you were looking at shell built-ins? Since some of which will override binaries (such as echo I think) depending on the setup.

Or perhaps the fact that busybox can also be compiled so that it can be a shell? (iirc ash).

For DSL, there has always been the option of 'upgrading' to the coreutils to their gnu counterparts (gnu-utils) to replace busybox ones, and there are also various other shells available.

So I guess I can see how it can be confusing for you!

*howling* stop, you're killing me. LOL They're coming to take me away, haha, hoho,heehee.....

Next Page...
original here.