Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 01:36:30PM -0400, 
dufflebunk AT pizzaz.wite3.on.cogeco.ca wrote:
> I don't recall our bash ever being staticly linked. It is possible to 
> build bash without the readline problem, it's been optional for a while 
> now. That said, a static bash as a fallback would be a good thing to 
> have.

The one in devel now installs /bin/bash.static in addition to the normal
one.

> On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 02:07:25PM +0200, Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I just updated readline and bash in the devel grimoire and while doing
> > this totally broke my readline install which left me with no working
> > shell on my system. Luckily i managed to recover from that using a
> > static busybox i got from a rpm on the web, but it made me wonder why we
> > don't install a static bash binary in addition to the dynamic one
> > anymore. I know we used to do that, and I think it's a nice fallback for
> > such problems. Does anyone remember why we removed that from the bash
> > spell?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Arwed v. Merkatz                              Source Mage GNU/Linux 
> > developer
> >                                                     
> > http://www.sourcemage.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > SM-Discuss mailing list
> > SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> 

-- 
Arwed v. Merkatz                              Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
                                                    http://www.sourcemage.org