This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] sln: Install as a hard link to ldconfig
- From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at imgtec dot com>
- To: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>
- Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 17:28:19 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] sln: Install as a hard link to ldconfig
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160713121747.6F56A401AE80B@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <mvminw9d80c.fsf@hawking.suse.de> <aaa80fbd-3194-0124-f34b-270733732cf2@redhat.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1607270020380.4076@tp.orcam.me.uk> <20160801140802.GV6702@vapier.lan> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1608011525510.19723@tp.orcam.me.uk> <20160802161914.GB6702@vapier.lan>
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i agree, but i don't think it's something we need to support. having just
> a static (bash) shell doesn't get you very far -- you've got a few bash
> builtins and that's it. trying to actually recover from things often need
> far more commands. sln only helps you with creating symlinks (e.g. like
> resetting glibc links, assuming it's a glibc install error). i think that
> special casing this one scenario doesn't make sense nowadays.
FAOD, I wrote:
> This is to get the facts straight that is -- whether to keep or discard
> `sln' is of course another matter.
which I think clarifies my statement was not meant to support the
retaining of `sln', but just to clear any confusion there might be about
ways of recovery provided by Linux.
> in Gentoo, we ship a build of busybox with a lot of built-in commands.
> you can recover form a wide range of issues, set up the network, fetch
> files over the network, and decompress/unpack archives.
Coincidentally I thought it would be a good idea to have `busybox' as the
static shell, so I find it nice that you have thought about it too.
Maciej