Re: how to make Debian less fragile (long and philosophical)
On Sun, Aug 15, 1999 at 08:20:24AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> While staticly linked binaries would have avoided the recent brokenness in
> bash. It is not the solution to a "fragile" development process. How
> different would the situation be if the staticly linked bash (upgraded
> first to "guarantee" success of the rest of the install) was subtly broken
> such that certain crucial install processes fail. Now you are in the same
> boat as with dynamic linked brokenness.
Or the building of packages using fakeroot?
To solve that one we'd either have to change all of Debian to build
correctly with SHELL being something other than /bin/sh, or the "known
good" shell can't be /bin/sh (the current situation when you use sash).
Case closed?
--
The idea is that the first face shown to people is one they can readily
accept - a more traditional logo. The lunacy element is only revealed
subsequently, via the LunaDude. [excerpted from the Lunatech Identity Manual]
Reply to: