Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 19:41:55 -0400 From: W Gerald Hicks <gehicks@gehicks.dyndns.org> To: Darren Pilgrim <dmp@pantherdragon.org> Cc: freebsd-small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Guide to reducing FreeBSD (a.k.a miniBSD :) Message-ID: <752D613B-8EDE-11D6-AA48-0030657B5F1E@gehicks.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <3D229963.EF2B40B3@pantherdragon.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, July 3, 2002, at 02:27 AM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: > W Gerald Hicks wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, July 3, 2002, at 12:10 AM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: >> [snips] >>> As long as you realize that if a /bin or /sbin program can't run due >>> to missing/corrupt libraries that you may or may not be able to even >>> boot single-user. At the very least, /bin/sh, /sbin/mount, >>> /sbin/init, >>> and /sbin/fsck should be static builds. >>> >> >> Libraries residing in a linked-in MD_ROOT_IMAGE are available whenever >> the kernel is >> but it still seems more space efficient for that small handful of >> critical files to be crunch-linked. > > Those libraries can still get corrupted. Using dynamic binaries adds > a point of failure. It's not much more space taken for just those few > programs, so why increase the risk? It's no more risk than having a corrupted kernel image. At some point your eggs are all in one basket anyway :-) Cheers, Jerry Hicks gehicks@gehicks.dyndns.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?752D613B-8EDE-11D6-AA48-0030657B5F1E>