Re: Poor failure recovery

["Kurt D. Starsinic" <kstar@chapin.edu>]

On Mon, Oct 11, 1999 at 06:02:52PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> I want to know why we don't have any statically-linked essential
> utilities on a standard install.  Shell, cat, cp, ls, mv, rm, fsck,
> etc.
> 
> The ultimate in this silliness is fsck, which is dynamically linked,
> and is invoked to potentially fix the filesystem on which its
> libraries reside.  This tool at least should be provided with a
> statically-linked version.
> 
> Some might suggest "use the boot floppies."  Not always an option.
> Sometimes they don't contain versions compatible with the one on the
> installed system, meaning LOTS of extra work.  Besides, why introduce
> another failure mode (lost disk, bad floopy, bad floppy drive, etc) to 
> system recovery?

    While we're at it, maybe somebody would like to package crunchgen?

    http://www.flame.org/cgi-bin/uncgi/hman?page=crunchgen&sect=&arch=i386

    Peace,
* Kurt Starsinic (Kurt.Starsinic@isinet.com) --------- Technical Specialist *
|   `Don't worry about people stealing your ideas; if your ideas are any    |
|    good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats.' - Howard Aiken   |
Institute for Scientific Information                   http://www.isinet.com/