On Tue, Aug 17, 1999 at 06:06:50PM -0500, Todd Humphries wrote: > > This thread doesn't seem to want to die. Justin has convinced a > few people that static-linked emergency binaries could be desirable. > Others do not see the utility. But does it have to be one way or the > other? I want my everyday base utilities to be statically linked for all > of the optimization reasons mentioned. But, to me, *also* having a rescue > set of statically linked packages seems wise as well. Why not just put > together a "statically linked rescue" package and provide it as an option > on Debian install? This would install static versions of the base tools > somewhere out of the way, so that they are only used in times of system > brokenness. But only if you want the redundency... i am for a rescue iso bootable image with all sort of magic tools. in trouble you take it out and reboot the machine. yes, you have to reboot it. if you want tools ready to use without rebooting, try statically linked binaries :) -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok <cavok@freemail.it> --[ get my public pgp key at http://www.freeweb.org/free/cavok/
Attachment:
pgpB5SX5ki0tJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature