Re: Possible ITP: Rescue Package
On Mon, Jul 26, 1999 at 02:46:28PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> The desire is to have the tools execute easily, so long path names for
> their location is not desirable. An alternate method would add a simple
> short string to the front of the command names, so vi would becom rsqvi,
> cp would become rsqcp, etc...
They could be put in /bin/static; you'd just have to do a
PATH=/bin/static:$PATH. (Is this FHS compliant? Would /lib/staticbin be
better?)
> ash
> nvi/vim/elvis (someone else has to fight this one out)
> ee
> grep
> awk
ls, cp, rm, cat, mkdir, ln
ls: I know, echo *, but:
a) echo isn't a builtin in ash
b) ls -l is useful
cp, rm, mkdir: Self-evident, I hope. I think cp+rm is sufficent and mv is not
necessary.
ln: to fix those shared libs symlinks that got you in trouble in the first
place. (Strictly, not neccessary, as you can cp and fix them when the
system is at least somwhat operational.)
cat: Even if for nothing other then cat > resolv.conf. Note that a minimal
cat can be written fairly easily that dosn't need libc (you can use the
system calls write() and read() directly and use a static buffer). I think
I'll try it now just for the challenge. (I dought you can be portable to
Hurd this way, but I thought the hurd kernel was dynamicly linked. (If
you feel the need to correct me, do it in private mail, this is OT.))
(Same goes for cp and rm, for that matter. I think.)
If you include sed, you don't need an editor, strictly. (Then again, awk
could be considered a superset of grep and sed, so lets not go there, as I
never learned awk.) And if you include ee, you don't need a vi-ish editor,
if we're going for a minimum of required space.
> ...as I must pull in the sources for them all...
Can you relink an existing executable static? (From my quick search, no,
but I could well be wrong. ("ld -Bstatic /usr/lib/libc.a executable" dosn't
do what you might expect it to.))
-=- James Mastros
Reply to: