* Dale Scheetz said: > > > I'm not complaining that it actually crashed here, so much as I am > > > complaining that this is just a disaster waiting to happen, whether > > > potato is marked stable or unstable--it's fundamentally in there. > > And, as I said before, dynamic linking can break anywhere, not only in an > > unstable distro. > > FUD Oh? > If what you say were true, you would be arguing that NO programs should be > dynamicly linked. That would be stupid. No, I'm not saying it BREAKS, nor that it WILL break, I'm merely saying that it CAN break - which, as you can see (and as you write below), happened. I'm not saying that everything should be linked statically, because IT IS stupid - I just don't understand why there shouldn't be a set of EMERGENCY utilities in a standard installation of Debian? I mean, what's the problem to provide them, just for sake of an accident? > 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. True, but you, I, we are not the only ones involved in this. It may happen that somebody breaks his system by, say, deleting /lib/libc6*whatever.so. Why not give him a simple and clean way out of the trouble? > Slink had at least one incident of a bash installation failure during its > unstable existance. Those problems were fixed and slink is now considered > "robust". This has nothing to do with dynamic linking. Well, if one part of a chain breaks, the entire chain is spoiled. It has to do with dynamic linking. See the above example. regards, marek
Attachment:
pgpIh3nM_r4Kp.pgp
Description: PGP signature