Mike Frysinger posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:38:47 -0400:
> the idea is to remove 'sash' from our system target and replace it with > busybox ... That reminds me... I never /was/ able to get sash to compile here (~amd64, originally installed as 2004.1, last tried again to compile sash as 2004.3, IIRC). I finally injected it, and continued on with the emerge system... Emergency shell? I have a total of four levels of hard drive backup, two working and tested snapshots of both my root and /usr partitions, on each of two different drives, which also contain independent LILO installations, and separate /home partitions (only working and backup drive snaps, not four snaps, of each of those). BTW, I've also a total of 8 copies of my fstab and partition tables, two each on each of the two roots on each drive, in case something happens to my working copies of those. If those all fail at once, I suppose I'll be stuck booting from LiveCD/DVD, but I hope to beat the odds on that happening. If it does, I don't guess much of the system is likely to have survived to be usable at all, anyway. =8^O So... I'd say neither one is necessary in the system target. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- [email protected] mailing list
