3 ms·
Shouldn't busybox-based distros use busybox sh? (busybox sh is apparently a close cousin to dash, since they both derive from the Almquist shell.)
by jwilk 9y ago
Shouldn't busybox-based distros use busybox sh?
(busybox sh is apparently a close cousin to dash, since they both derive from the Almquist shell.)
- SwellJoe 9y agoI dunno, I just read it when researching the state of shells on various distros. Yep, according to notes in the source for the busybox shell: "This shell is actually a derivative of the Debian "dash" shell by Herbert Xu, which was created by porting the "ash" shell, written by Kenneth Almquist, from NetBSD." https://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/shell/Config.in?id=9d7010ca86feff8fffdfecadf6554ca9aac268c1 https://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/shell/Config.in?id=9d70... So, yes, it is the "busybox shell", but the busybox shell is a version of dash. So, if you target dash, you're good for busybox distros.