[yocto] I hate busybox!

[Khem Raj]

> On Sep 15, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Trevor Woerner <twoerner at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 09/15/15 04:26, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
>> My embedded system has enough room in it for full-featured command line
>> tools, instead of the wretched busybox. Does the Yocto meta-data include a
>> layer that provides such tools? Or does OE? And how would I disable
>> busybox in order to use the better tools?
> 
> +1
> 
> ...although "hate" is a strong word, I have been tripped up numerous
> times in the past by writing a script on my development host only to
> find it doesn't work on my target device due to the restrictions of the
> various busybox executables. The "embedded" system of today is the
> desktop system of only a couple years ago. The only place busybox (and
> toybox) are needed today are in the MMU-less-type systems, such as
> Cortex-Ms etc.

I agree on busybox differences but sometimes its not about the utilities they are needed for some sundry work.
What would be interesting to know is how much size increase is caused by replacing all busybox functionality
with other utilities and also RAM consumption. That can give valuable information for someone who is assembling embedded system stack and help him/her the decision making. embedded systems of today might have more memory and what not, but they are also running more
complex applications than in past, so software bloat has caught up with more memory, in the end you still need to be cautious about the footprint and equation remains almost same.

I believe once we have a busybox replacement package group we can get the information I asked in para 1 which is a good thing.