From: jwinstea@fenris.claremont.edu (Jim Winstead Jr.) Subject: Re: /bin files should not be linked with shared libs! Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 07:02:40 GMT
In article <1993Mar11.021924.20199@wam.umd.edu> joel@wam.umd.edu (Joel M. Hoffman) writes:
Is there anything really wrong with including a statically linked
ln standard? (Or, if you're concerned about general performance
with ln, how about a ln.static, that just sits around, watiting for
the operator to do something stupid.)
A statically linked 'ln' takes up a bunch space. Doing even more
binaries that way takes even more space. If you're working with a
boot/root floppy to begin with, you simply don't have room for
statically linked executables. But if you have a boot/root floppy,
there's no need for them. That's what backups are for.
Come to think of it, statically linked umount.static, mount.static and
cp.static would be enough to fix almost any shared-lib related
problem. No?
Actually, there's a far easier solution: keep a boot/root floppy that
has all the basic tools that you need. This is *by far* the most
sensible solution.