Re: Providing a static e2fsck ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 24 Mar 1998, Brian White wrote:
> Once fsck has run, it may have fixed things such that libraries previously
> unavailable can now be seen by dpkg, ls, or whatever.
Yes, but considering that the size of the statically linked fsck is more
or less the size of the dynamically linked plus the size of the
dynamic libraries, the probability of having a static fsck messed up is
more or less the same as having a dynamic fsck or any of the libraries
it depends on also messed up.
I don't see a real saving here.
If the fsck proper is messed up, you will need a boot disk anyway.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1
iQCUAgUBNRgOwyqK7IlOjMLFAQGe/wP3dLDG7qAsTc1apI47DKHOHX+7vYbUq9fy
lG8XNOudyLX4NZMBzalvXTGMEKnjqcKk7EsR/6OW0P7FYMCE4JvCKuZ01LFvc+AD
DSVeaeUgf7NZE8crBh3IaJ3H4mSCX26cQUJYRN/i1H0Q8S57DIEQAqd5WyyqBMal
4SEuerjDhw==
=qDwy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: