Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
Tushar Teredesai wrote: http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/lfs-dev/2002-January/022604.html And on Debian Sarge, e2fsck is dynamically linked. -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscri

RE: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Jeremy Herbison
> Jeremy Herbison wrote: > > Okay, but in the event that it finds a problem, you'll still need a > recovery > > disk of some sort. Or, if it can't run fsck at all because fsck is > linked to > > a damaged .so, you'll know there is a problem anyhow and you'll STILL > need > > a recovery disk with a

Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Jeremy Herbison wrote: Okay, but in the event that it finds a problem, you'll still need a recovery disk of some sort. Or, if it can't run fsck at all because fsck is linked to a damaged .so, you'll know there is a problem anyhow and you'll STILL need a recovery disk with a different fsck binary

RE: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Jeremy Herbison
> Jeremy Herbison wrote: > > Except that you typically run fsck on an unmounted disk, so a fsck > binary > > on the damaged partition isn't going to help you, whether it is linked > to > > other libraries or not. > > So tell me how you run fsck on your root filesystem at startup if you > don't mou

Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Jeremy Herbison wrote: Except that you typically run fsck on an unmounted disk, so a fsck binary on the damaged partition isn't going to help you, whether it is linked to other libraries or not. So tell me how you run fsck on your root filesystem at startup if you don't mount the disk at all?

RE: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Jeremy Herbison
> Dan Nicholson wrote: > > Recently when doing some ICA on e2fsprogs I noticed that /sbin/e2fsck > > is statically linked. Is this what we want? I might need a solid > > blow from the cluebat, but seems most of the time we make shared > > binaries when possible. e2fsprogs builds both a shared an

Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Dan Nicholson
On 1/10/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote: > > Ah, yes, that is a good reason. Man, that cluebat stings! > > Don't it though? :) Eh, we've all had our share of cluebat hits. Except > maybe Patrakov. He always seems to have all the answers. What d'ya say > we gang

Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Dan Nicholson wrote: Ah, yes, that is a good reason. Man, that cluebat stings! Don't it though? :) Eh, we've all had our share of cluebat hits. Except maybe Patrakov. He always seems to have all the answers. What d'ya say we gang up and give him his share of pummeling? ;) -- JH -- http://l

Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Dan Nicholson
On 1/10/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote: > > To have the > > shared e2fsck installed, you can add --enable-dynamic-e2fsck to the > > configure line. > > Well, if the file-system is corrupted, wouldn't you want to be using as > few files on that system as possibl

Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Tushar Teredesai
On 1/10/06, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Comments? > http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/lfs-dev/2002-January/022604.html :-) -- Tushar Teredesai mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: Static e2fsck

2006-01-10 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Dan Nicholson wrote: Recently when doing some ICA on e2fsprogs I noticed that /sbin/e2fsck is statically linked. Is this what we want? I might need a solid blow from the cluebat, but seems most of the time we make shared binaries when possible. e2fsprogs builds both a shared and static e2fsck,