On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, jwd wrote:
> The real problem with the changes to bash and moving libreadline to /lib
> (BTW, bash requires libhistory, too) is that bash prior to 2.04-4mdk had
> both libreadline and libhistory as static links and at leat one person
> pointed out that this was a good thing. You could always get bash going
> before this change was made.
>
> Instead of really looking at the porblem we got a reaction to the
> symptom and someone moved readline to /lib. The problem was not with
> readline but with bash. Now we find that moving readline to /lib causes
> other problems.
>
> please -- a little attention to detail here. Bash needs to be fixed not
> readline.
Isn't it unwise to have a bash with static library's for normal use? Why
can't there exist to versions? Or why couldn't the script's before /usr is
mounted use sash, or som other lightweight static shell?
seb
