Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 8 May 2003 11:41:47 -0700
From:      "David O'Brien" <arch@freebsd.org>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>
Cc:        arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Fw: /rescue
Message-ID:  <20030508184147.GA56336@dragon.nuxi.com>
In-Reply-To: <200305081717.h48HHPTl020707@harmony.village.org>
References:  <20030508165630.GA55207@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030508.094206.68986125.imp@bsdimp.com> <200305081717.h48HHPTl020707@harmony.village.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:17:25AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> : It was also felt this patch puts way too much into /stand -- like vi
> : (rather than edit) and dhclient for instance.  /stand should be just
> : enough to recover a system by a *skilled* person.
> 
> I disagree.  I think it keeps a good amount of stuff in there.  Sure,
> I can do an echo * rather than an ls, but the binary is so small and

You're going to an extreme -- I didn't mention ls, I mentioned nvi (about
1MB static).

> disk space so cheap it makes no sense to have to force it so that only

Don't forget we aren't talking about the size of the *entire* disk, the
size of / is the issue (especially for source upgrades from 4.x) .  Maybe
I should change sysinstall to use a 2GB / and have it include /usr --
that certainly makes things easier for a dynamic /.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030508184147.GA56336>