Re: IMPORTANT : latest bash intall fails and bash is no more usable!!!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
>I couldn't even reboot when this happened. I rebuilt a bash 2.0.2
>directly from the source, and linked it *statically* to replace
>the binary in /bin.
>
>I still don't understand while binaries in /bin are NOT
>statically linked as the should be. Have a look at what BSD does.
>/bin an /sbin contains statically linked binaries :-)
I have at least 10 shells open. Unless I am greatly mistaken, running 10 static
bash's would be quite severe on memory use. Of course it would be very handy
to have a package that provides a static bash, and come to think of it, maybe there
should be one. But to replace all binaries in /bin and /sbin with static ones, is
IMHO simply too much, and it would only pay its use in weird situations, which are,
again IMHO, solvable just as well with shared binaries.
- --
Konstantinos Margaritis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBNxslz/alfJok8qABAQE8rgP7BWdYYtjypNnzh4ag49frtzgSymfMOQkH
0Z0gfoSrVrWH1GxdCeYon8WbyX6dLvEI08gUQ63Ybljz2OIGfSG0VOa8al5xIb4S
+1U9G2ASd3tsch1w5/H5taqovwjILqBUCk+2MyHM02eBoDApwKZuX3VyMZKH/NMj
9b7DmKB5rGU=
=bL07
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: