Re: Bootup and package managment (and a small status report)

[Leonardo Lopes Pereira]

Em Dom, 2005-09-18 às 13:33 +0200, Alfred M. Szmidt escreveu:
>    One could also store ld.so.1, unionfs, and all other core bits in
>    /init (or similar), and just use those filenames.  But then when
>    upgrading glibc/hurd/gnumach one must upgrade /init in some manner
>    that doesn't involve unionfs, maybe copying the currently installed
>    versions there on shutdown.
> 
> I might note that it might be possible to copy the duplicates directly
> to /lib, /hurd etc if one hacks cp to support copying to the
> underlying file-system.
> 
> I suppose that this is the only clean solution...  Thoughts?

I think that the better solution to that is create a group of packages
that will not be managed by unionfs. Something that, if unionfs fails,
will be able to boot the system to the user see what is happening and
try to solve. The packages that, IMHO, cannot be handled by unionfs are:
 - GlibC
 - Coreutils
 - Hurd
 - Mach
 - Bash
 - dmd

I do not know if there are more necessary packages to boot the system,
but I know that those are necessary to boot.


> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnu-system-discuss mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-system-discuss
-- 
---
leonardolopespereira at gmail.com

GNU Privacy Guard (GPG)
ID da chave: 83E8AFBF | servidor: keys.indymedia.org
gpg --keyserver keys.indymedia.org --recv-keys 83E8AFBF

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part