Lo, on Tuesday, May 21, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry did write: Where's the attribution? Who was the OP?
> > Why the sam hell is there not, by default, no questions asked, it's > > installed because it's *right*, a statically linked /sbin/sh as > > roots default shell? > because the days of static bins are long passed. In most cases, yes. However, the OP has a point. Consider: [vimes:~]$ ldd /bin/bash libncurses.so.5 => /lib/libncurses.so.5 (0x40016000) libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x40055000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40059000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000) On my potato box, /lib/libc.so.6 is a symlink to libc-2.1.3.so. If I've fscked up that symlink, bash won't load. Certain binaries, particularly /bin/sh and /bin/ln, need to be statically linked to allow root to recover from problems like this. If you don't want to statically link /bin/ln, then make sure that /sbin/ldconfig is statically linked. (On my system, at least, ldconfig is statically linked. Still doesn't help much if I can't get to it because my shell won't load.) > if *you* want this, Debian makes it even easier. apt-get install > sash. not only is is statically linked it also includes enough stuff > to help you save a system. > > Debian is very strongly against making any decision for you we do not > have to make. And almost all of our decisions can be overruled. True, but I really can't see any harm in making root's shell a statically-linked binary, myself. After all, how many root shells do you expect to have running at one time? Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]