> That is so COOL!! I remember f*cking up one of my first linux computers > that way. If I had known, I wouldn't have to go back to reinstall the > many diskettes of slackware (no live cds at that time!, no easy way > to fix the fs).
What happened was (If I remember correctly) that I renamed the /lib directory. (PLEASE DON'T TRY THAT AT HOME!!) Again, this: >> In the end I had to use >> bash's built-in echo command to recreate a statically-linked busybox >> binary via copy-n-pasting over the terminal, is so cool!! --jm On 02/20/2012 11:56 PM, Juan Manuel Cabo wrote: > On 02/20/2012 11:06 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 02:00:20AM +0100, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: >> ... >> Yeah I remember that. I thought they've since fixed it, though. That's >> more a bash limitation than anything, AFAIK. Besides, what *were* you >> trying to do with such a long command-line anyway? :-) >> ... > > I can think of one case where the command line argument limit > is a problem: copying or moving files from a huge directory. > In that case, to do it with bash, there is no other way around > but to do things such as iterate over the alphabet to copy the files that > start with 'a', then the ones with 'b'.. > > >> ... >> But then again, I *did* also have to deal with having to repair a remote >> Linux server whose dynamic linker broke, causing basic commands like ls, >> cp, chmod, to be completely non-functional. In fact, *nothing* worked >> except that last remote login running bash. In the end I had to use >> bash's built-in echo command to recreate a statically-linked busybox >> binary via copy-n-pasting over the terminal, in order to get things back >> into working condition again. (Yeah. Definitely not for the faint of >> heart.) >> ... >> >> T >> > > That is so COOL!! I remember f*cking up one of my first linux computers > that way. If I had known, I wouldn't have to go back to reinstall the > many diskettes of slackware (no live cds at that time!, no easy way > to fix the fs). > > --jm >
