From: keith@ksmith.com (Keith Smith) Subject: Re: The dangers of playing with shared libraries Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 03:20:21 GMT
In article <C5EG47.Kqr@wyvern.wyvern.com> caywood@wyvern.wyvern.com (John Caywood) writes:
>Steve VanDevender (stevev@miser.uoregon.edu) wrote:
>
> [ stuff deleted ]
>
>: in to fix the problem, I would like to _strongly_ suggest that
>: 'ln' be statically linked or that a statically linked version of
>: 'ln' be made available in the distribution so that it is possible
>: to recover from this mistake the obvious way.
>
>I second the motion. I got bit installing gcc486 instead of the gcc386
>that came with SLS 0.99pl2. 'ln' is not the only candidate for static
>linking -- I can think of ls, mv, and (maybe) cat in the same got-to-have-it
>category. I can't see it if I can't 'ls'; if I can 'mv' it, I don't need
Sure you can "see" it :
# echo *
Will happily list all the files in your cwd.
Bare minimum is your shell, 'cat' and 'mv' IMHO. 'ln' would be nice,
but not absolutely neccessary, You can always make a COPY temporarily,
and then link back correctly later.
-- Keith Smith keith@ksmith.com 5719 Archer Rd. Digital Designs BBS 1-919-423-4216 Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201 Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...