| 1 |
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 09:07:15PM -0700, Sami Samhuri wrote: |
| 2 |
> * On Sun May-15-2005 at 05:18:06 PM -0400, Mike Frysinger said: |
| 3 |
> [...] |
| 4 |
> > my proposal is to implement a new utility (called 'erescue' for lack of a |
| 5 |
> > better name) that is written in C and designed to be statically linked ... |
| 6 |
> > then next time you break a core system package which cannot be recovered by |
| 7 |
> > simply running `emerge` a few times, you run `erescue <broken package>` |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Everyone who is saying that Portage can already sort of handle this |
| 10 |
> seems to be missing one important point. If Python is broken then emerge |
| 11 |
> won't work. The proposed erescue would still work in that case. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
If erescue is a statically built binary that basically untars a |
| 14 |
backed up copy of a package, why would it depend on Python? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
David Stanek |
| 19 |
www.roninds.net |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
GPG keyID #6272EDAF on http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 22 |
Key fingerprint = 8BAA 7E11 8856 E148 6833 655A 92E2 3E00 6272 EDAF |
Archives