Re: Statically linked "cp" or "mv"
From: Robert E A Harvey (robertharvey_at_my-deja.com)
Date: 02/13/05
- Next message: Tommi Jensen: "Re: REQ:Which Linux Flavor?"
- Previous message: Rodney Kelp: "Re: REQ:Which Linux Flavor?"
- Next in thread: Bill Unruh: "Re: Statically linked "cp" or "mv""
- Reply: Bill Unruh: "Re: Statically linked "cp" or "mv""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 13 Feb 2005 08:12:06 -0800
noone@uber.usachoice.net (Wiseguy) wrote :
> distros have mangled the /sbin concept by putting dynamic
> executables in there so you can no longer rely on /sbin being just
> for static binaries.
Oh? I'm surprised. I havn't come across this, but I'll take your
word for it.
In extremis, it is possible either to boot from the installation disk
in rescue mode, and use the commands from there on a mounted hard
disk, or to make other provision.
I'd suggest looking at http://www.busybox.net/ for 'other provision'
It may be easier than compiling each of cp, mv, mount... yourself.
- Next message: Tommi Jensen: "Re: REQ:Which Linux Flavor?"
- Previous message: Rodney Kelp: "Re: REQ:Which Linux Flavor?"
- Next in thread: Bill Unruh: "Re: Statically linked "cp" or "mv""
- Reply: Bill Unruh: "Re: Statically linked "cp" or "mv""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]