Subject: Re: Dynamic libraries, bad libc and problems...
To: Luke Mewburn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Johnny Billquist <email@example.com>
Date: 10/02/2002 10:31:22
On Wed, 2 Oct 2002, Luke Mewburn wrote:
> I read Jason's reply as answering the concern about the stability of
> the /rescue tools in that circumstance, not the trustworthiness of
> dynamic linked applications in this case..
> I.e, Johnny was concerned that /rescue can't be "trusted" with a
> broken libc. Jason's comment is that a statically linked /bin
> would be affected by the same issue, so it's a moot point.
My main concern was that I was stuck between a rock and a hard
place. Things are still very broken, but I'm trying to do a total rebuild
now, after building a new kernel.
Noone really did help with any suggestions on either how to get out of
this dilemma, nor why libc for me has broken down.
Oh well. I'll see if I can get unstuck. Expect an announcement in a week
or so (the bloat and speed issues should be raised in priority I think).
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: firstname.lastname@example.org || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol