Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2022 22:56:15 -0700 From: David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 12.2 can not be upgraded Message-ID: <edb6cc2a-5ba1-0c7c-8405-b7ec546d5c02@holgerdanske.com> In-Reply-To: <D6FA74F6-B8C9-4CD8-B58D-27D1B01025C0@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.2209041200310.67914@bucksport.safeport.com> <AA1D2084-FB1A-418E-A26A-D468312A6DC5@gushi.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.2209041352190.67914@bucksport.safeport.com> <D6FA74F6-B8C9-4CD8-B58D-27D1B01025C0@gromit.dlib.vt.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/4/22 13:31, Paul Mather wrote: > I don't understand your comment about /rescue/sh in the first sentence > in the quoted paragraph above. The binaries in /rescue are statically > linked, so I don't see how they depend on /libexec. In fact, ldd will > even complain if you run it against /rescue/sh because it is not a > dynamically-linked executable. Furthermore, file(1) will include > "statically linked" in its output when run against /rescue/sh. > (Disclaimer: I don't have any 12.x systems any more to double-check, > but it is true for FreeBSD 13.1 and historically has been the case for > as long as I know. See man rescue(8) for details.) Here is what one of my 12.3-R systems has to say about /rescue/sh: 2022-09-04 22:08:51 dpchrist@f3 ~ $ freebsd-version ; uname -a 12.3-RELEASE-p6 FreeBSD f3.tracy.holgerdanske.com 12.3-RELEASE-p6 FreeBSD 12.3-RELEASE-p6 GENERIC amd64 2022-09-04 22:09:02 dpchrist@f3 ~ $ ldd /rescue/sh ldd: /rescue/sh: not a dynamic ELF executable 2022-09-04 22:09:04 dpchrist@f3 ~ $ file /rescue/sh /rescue/sh: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (FreeBSD), statically linked, for FreeBSD 12.3, FreeBSD-style, stripped David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?edb6cc2a-5ba1-0c7c-8405-b7ec546d5c02>