Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:05:53 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> Cc: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@web.de> Subject: Re: bin/72138: libc.so.5 isn't installed in a safe way Message-ID: <m3k6uetdri.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> In-Reply-To: <20040928174000.GF18611@ip.net.ua> (Ruslan Ermilov's message of "Tue, 28 Sep 2004 20:40:00 %2B0300") References: <20040927224353.845381B217@merlin.emma.line.org> <20040928043351.GA2400@frontfree.net> <20040928071758.GB14942@ip.net.ua> <m31xgmzt34.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> <20040928153537.GA3185@frontfree.net> <20040928174000.GF18611@ip.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> writes: > My patch does this for "precious" shared libraries. And yes, putting > "INSTALL=install -S" is what I had in mind when suggesting to test > installworld times. INSTALL="install -S" makes zero difference for kernel installs on FreeBSD 4. OK, it does make a difference which is less than 3%, and I made a single run with and without that variable, so it's all buried in the noise. -- Matthias Andree Encrypted mail welcome: my GnuPG key ID is 0x052E7D95 (PGP/MIME preferred)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m3k6uetdri.fsf>