David O'Brien wrote: > On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 12:08:58PM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: > >>... I think [/rescue] only needs to support those >>recovery actions necessary to repair /bin and /sbin if they break. > > My stance is that no failure mode needs to > be repairable that wasn't repairable with a static /. I'm willing to compromise, David. Here's what I suggest: * I could support removing vi/ex from /rescue. * In exchange for this concession, would you be willing to support adding fetch? I expect this exchange would result in a net 150-200 kB savings in /rescue. How about it? TimReceived on Mon Nov 24 2003 - 14:49:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:30 UTC