David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 12:08:58PM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote:
... I think [/rescue] only needs to support those recovery actions necessary to repair /bin and /sbin if they break.
My stance is that no failure mode needs to be repairable that wasn't repairable with a static /.
I'm willing to compromise, David.
Here's what I suggest:
* I could support removing vi/ex from /rescue.
* In exchange for this concession, would you be willing to support adding fetch?
I expect this exchange would result in a net 150-200 kB savings in /rescue.
How about it?
Tim
I think a better compromise is to add the make.conf option so that extra utilities may be added to /rescue. Then leave both vi and fetch out of the default.
With the size of disk drives these days, (for my own setup) I'm tempted to just add a complete copy of /bin and /sbin into /rescue. The extra 100 meg doesn't take much out of a 80 gig hard drive.
Richard Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
