Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BusyBox Goes 1.0.0

Posted by michael on from the size-matters dept.

prostoalex writes "BusyBox, a stripped-down minimalistic toolkit for embedded Linux, is now shipping 1.0.0. ChangeLog is available on the project Web site."

5 of 24 comments (clear)

  1. The people that make this... by cs02rm0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...are liars I tell you!

    They robbed us of a real screenshot!

  2. Obligatory by geeveees · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...link to the Hall Of Shame: http://www.busybox.net/shame.html

    It's a list of all the companies that use(d) BusyBox in some way without releasing the source code.

    --
    I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
  3. busybox is not .. by josepha48 · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... just for Linux anymore.. it is also available for FreeBSD and NetBSD, in their packages / ports sections.. anyone who wants to make a small basic rescue floppy / bootable cd could probably use this..

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!
    Does slashdot hate my posts?

  4. distro by vijaya_chandra · · Score: 4, Informative

    GeexBox is one cool tiny linux distro for creating bootable media discs using BusyBox

    Let the box be busy

  5. The finer points of gross misunderstanding by Kaseijin · · Score: 3, Informative
    The GPL does not require disclosure of source code for *use* of the software. It also does not require one to *release* the source code, only provide it to customers.
    In context, "use" implies distribution; it's imprecise, but hardly evidence of a "gross misunderstanding". I have no idea what you infer from "release" that you don't from "provide" or "make... available". Also, your own reading is in error. The GPL says nothing about "customers"; the source must "accompany" the binaries (whether provided to customers, partners, or anyone else) or be offered to "any third party".
    According to some readings of the GPL, if you don't modify the sources, you could even get away with merely providing a link to the Busybox ftp site!
    Section 3c, which allows the recipient of a binary and an offer simply to pass on both, applies only to noncommercial distribution. Most if not all the products in the hall of shame are commercial, and the one possible exception I saw does not include information about an offer of source Also, I cannot see how I could satisfy section 3c by linking to the BusyBox FTP site. The web site contains source, not an offer, and the FTP site appears not to be open to the public. A link by itself doesn't meet the requirements of an offer in section 3b, and I would need a 3b offer to make a 3c reference.