Re: [gentoo-dev] Replace 'sash' with 'busybox' as our static rescue shell

[Spider <spider@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1339 bytes --]

On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 09:38 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i dont want to discuss the logistics of how this will be done just yet ...
> 
> the idea is to remove 'sash' from our system target and replace it with 
> busybox ... there are a few applets that sash implements and busybox does not 
> (chattr ed file lsattr printenv sum where), but i added chattr, lsattr, 
> printenv, and sum to busybox yesterday :) ... i've never heard of 'where' and 
> going by its behavior in sash, it's basically 'which' ... that leaves us with 
> 'ed' and 'file' which i think we can ignore and be OK ...
.....
> feedback !?
> -mike


Yes, Will you provide a migration phase?

That means, can you put busybox-shell to auto-conflict sash and
link /bin/sash to /bin/busybox-sh or what the binary is called?

Oh, and unless you have another editor as binary built into your shell,
don't remove ed.  A "trusted" editor is good.  Sash is seldom used for
"My system is haxxored"  however its often used for "I fucked up glibc"
and an editor is a handy thing, even if its as obscure as "ed"

Otherwise, I'd suggest this is a "default change" for 2005.next rather
than a replacement "right now".


//Spider


-- 
begin  .signature
Tortured users / Laughing in pain
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]