Subject: Re: keep init static? (was: Re: RFC: migration to a fully dynamically linked system)
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Julio Merino <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/30/2002 18:56:26
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002 18:48:28 +0200
Emmanuel Dreyfus <email@example.com> wrote:
> The more I think about it, the more I believe init should remain static.
> With a static init that would try /rescue/sh on /bin/sh failure, we can
> keep a working single user mode whatever happens. You can even rm
> /lib/ld.elf_so, the system will still be able to drop to single user.
And which is the difference of having a static init inside /rescue? If
/sbin/init does not work, the kernel can automatically fallback to
/rescue/init. It is just the same.
What I think is that having /sbin dynamic EXCEPT /sbin/init will cause
confusion. If we go dynamic, everything should be dynamic. IMHO.
HispaBSD admin - http://www.HispaBSD.org
For the developer - http://buildtool.sourceforge.net
Julio Merino <firstname.lastname@example.org>