it's not just about forking processes. Instead than a single binary that needs to satisfy as much use cases as possible while remaining small and general, you would have a lot of more atomic functions that users can mix and swap as needed case-by-case.
> Instead than a single binary that needs to satisfy as much use cases as possible while remaining small and general, you would have a lot of more atomic functions that users can mix and swap as needed case-by-case.
Maybe I'm missing something here (it's been a long time since I last looked at the busybox code), but isn't busybox a single file that has a lot of atomic functions that callers can mix and swap as needed, using the shell as a REPL?
IIRC, and please correct me if I am wrong), all those little functions in busybox are simply single functions. There's a `cat` function, and a `head` function, and a `cp` function, etc.
I don't see what can be gained by moving them into a library file, and using the shell to call those functions, instead of leaving them in the shell program and calling them.
