Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 8 May 2000 08:42:33 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com>
To:        Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
Cc:        Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: bin/18312: FreeBSD System Recovery -- mt not statically linked
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.10005080840141.23761-100000@semuta.feral.com>
In-Reply-To: <61326.957793693@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Mon, 8 May 2000, Sheldon Hearn wrote:

> 
> 
> On Fri, 05 May 2000 11:16:29 MST, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> 
> >     There's not much point statically linking mt if it's sitting in
> >     /usr/bin.  On the face of it it does seem a good candidate to move
> >     to /bin.
> 
> Given that having things move around in the base system carries with it
> varying degrees of pain, can you guys just explain why this is actually
> necessary?  Didn't someone point out a way to use restore in the absence
> of mt?

Yes, that was me. But maybe they're /usr that they want to restore isn't in
dump(8) format. I dunno- this is why I asked. It seems to me on the face of it
a reasonable thing to have- basic device manipulation available w/o /usr. But
there's no particular end to the number of things you *could* want to be
availble if someone takes a Mossberger to your /usr. So, I'm of two minds
about this.





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.10005080840141.23761-100000>