Re: how to make Debian less fragile (long and philosophical)

[Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>]

On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 11:31:20AM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
> Besides, what's the problem to name those binaries e.g. ls.static and simply
> use a static emergency shell with an alias capability (sash has it) to do:
> 
> alias ls=/bin/ls.static
> ...
> ...
> alias cat=/bin/cat.static
> 
> should they be needeed in case of failure. Then you never use static
> bins when the system is in normal mode.

IMO, it would be better to have a /bin/static/ directory and then just
set PATH=/bin/static:$PATH - then any package could just drop a static
version in there.

until someone makes a package with a collection of static bins, or at
least announces an ITP this thread is just going in circles. we can talk
for ages about how it might be nice to have static versions of some
binaries but there isn't much point unless someone who cares about the
issue actually steps forward and does something about it.

we've had the arguments, lets see the proof.

craig

--
craig sanders