On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 07:23:23AM -0600, Richard Rauch wrote:
> I don't know.  See
> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/current-users/2002/11/03/0011.html and tell
> me what it means.  (I had to manually type that, so in case it's wrong,
> the key sentence was "Many of the programs in /rescue lack features of
> their counterparts in /bin and /sbin (things are left out IN ORDER TO MAKE
> THEM SMALLER)." (My emphasis).)
> 
> Now, if that sentence (in particular, the emphaszed part) was bogus, then
> I'm happy.  If not, then I repeat that I'm distressed to hear that the
> size of the binaries in /rescue was an issue.  IMHO, they should not be
> gratuitiously dysfunctional.
> 
> Please note that that is *not* a complaint from someone about increased
> usage of / space.

I'm often surprised that why so many people misunderstand that the major
(and the only) benefit of dynamically linked binaries is saving disk
space. You know, hardly anybody cares about 10MB savings on his 100GB
disk nowadays. What dynamically linked binaries give is much more than
smaller disk space.

Jun-Young

-- 
Bang Jun-Young <junyoung@mogua.com>