Re: how to make Debian less fragile (long and philosophical)
On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 1999 at 06:51:37AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > FUD
> >
> > If what you say were true, you would be arguing that NO programs should be
> > dynamicly linked. That would be stupid.
> >
> > Dynamic linking only breaks when there is something wrong. Building a
> > distribution is a coordinated integration task, and when all of the
> > pieces-parts aren't compatible for one reason or another problems like the
> > recent bash failure show up...and then we fix it.
>
> On the other hand, Debian's documentation on what to do when the
> system goes south is rather limited.
I have apparently misunderstood the trust of the proposal then. I thought
the desire being expressed on this thread was to make it so the install
_couldn't_ break in the fashion we have seen with bash.
>
> [We do have a "boot with the rescue disk" comment somewhere, but
> there's no signficant cookbook of advice for dealing with common
> situations, and we have no useful recommendations for headless
> machines.]
I remember us having this discussion just a few weeks ago under the
thread:
Possible ITP: Rescue Package
and we decided that sash was sufficient for most purposes, and that a
static sulogin might be useful as well as a static editor. We never
discussed making a static dpkg or apt, or any other "core" programs as
that doesn't seem to be required.
>
> Maybe in my fabulous free time...
>
I believe Joseph Carter is the person to contact. He said he was still
interested in the Rescue Package concept, and probably has the same "free
time" problem ;-)
Luck,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Reply to: