Subject: Re: install could use some static binaries
To: David Brownlee , Scott Reynolds <email@example.com>
From: Webmaster Jim <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/06/1996 07:49:39
On Aug 6, 9:58am, David Brownlee wrote:
} Some ports already use 'edlabel', which is much easier for a
} novice than disklabel... space consideration on the miniroot
} probably rule this out, but its a nice idea :)
} > Part of the problem is simply that there is limited space in which to
} > shoehorn the install tools, and ed(1) has the distinct advantage of being
} > small.
The situation I had was post-disk partitioning where I wanted to load
the distribution files from an MS-DOS partition. I was able to use
mount_msdos to get to a floppy disk, so I thought having a "tools"
diskette (besides the kernel copy and install diskettes) would be handy
to set up the hard drive mount_msdos. I'm certainly going to create
one for myself, or even several, with static binaries for future use.
Perhaps there could be a consensus about other tools beyond vi and the
above-referenced "edlabel"? (not including X or emacs :-)
I would like to see kermit, but as I understand the license conditions,
this might be prohibited since the distribution may be resold.
I don't speak (or work) for the Baltimore County Public Library.
They keep telling me, "Shhhhh!"