Re: aaiiieeee, need some help rebuilding ld-linux.so.2
On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 11:48:27AM -0800, Heather Stern wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 05:34:17PM +0000, Nyk Tarr wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 08:57:27AM -0800, Michael K. O'Brien wrote:
> > > Hola~
> > >
> > > I was trying to downgrade libc6. For some reason, downgrading the package
> > > didn't update the ld-linux.so.2 link. So, in a moment of idiocy, I removed
> > > the ld-linux.so.2 so that I could relink it with a different version of
> > > ld.*.so. Well, after removing the link, I can't actually resolve any commands,
> > > which makes it difficult to rebuild the link.
> > >
> > > Is there any way to run a command without ld-linux.so.2? Is there any way to
> > > fix my system.
> > >
> >
> > Yup, but you need one of two things: another root partition - a repair
> > and recovery disk like Tom's rtbt, or a statically linked toolchain
> > (one that needs no dynamically linked libraries) - all of /sbin
> > should be statically linked, but sadly for you doesn't have ln.
> >
> > A quick google gives
> >
> > http://www.toms.net/rb/ for Tom's
> > http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/system/recovery/!INDEX.html
> > As a list of likely candidates
> >
> > or
> > http://lbt.linuxcare.com/
>
> and its competitor - the continuation of their original project
> http://www.lnx-bbc.org/
>
> > or even gnoppix for linux-on-a-cd, from which you could just mount your
> > hd and fix the link from there.
>
> That's knoppix (with a K; though gnome is alos available on it, the
> distro is named after Klaus Knopper, its maintainer)
Ah. That'd explain why I couldn't find it. ^_^
> http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/
>
> ...and directly debian based. A bit overkill just for rescue, but since
> it's really debian, you can probably safely raid binaries from it, and
> should also be able to dpkg-repack yourself a good .deb of something
> he's got.
Especially useful if you've got some odd hardware and need a module...
Although we should all have custom recovery disks.. ^_^
--
/__
\_|\/
/\
Reply to: