Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 14:12:12 +0800 From: chinsan <chinsan.tw@gmail.com> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pax in /rescue Message-ID: <1f27304c0809062312x7656c379gcd994be9fc0ca3e2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20080906.235633.-267228782.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20080906.224018.-1303464793.imp@bsdimp.com> <1f27304c0809062222m724603dat2fb1af63dba5faa6@mail.gmail.com> <20080906.235633.-267228782.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 1:56 PM, M. Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > In message: <1f27304c0809062222m724603dat2fb1af63dba5faa6@mail.gmail.com> > chinsan <chinsan.tw@gmail.com> writes: > : On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 12:40 PM, M. Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > : > Is there any reason to continue to include both tar and pax in > : > /rescue? > : > > : Maybe for rescue some important file? > > tar can read all the formats that pax can read. Why the duplication > in functionality? Oh, you are right. :p > > : BTW, could editors/e3 be include into /rescue? > : I think it's ineed to have a text editor to edit some file for rescue. > : Because vi(1) lives in /usr/bin. > > /rescue already has nvi. But nvi needs terminfo(5), so it needs to mount /usr filesystem too.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1f27304c0809062312x7656c379gcd994be9fc0ca3e2>