[roland at redhat.com: Re: More info on static binary/libnss* mystery]

Gerard Beekmans gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Oct 7 10:05:07 PDT 2002


On October 7, 2002 02:06 am, Greg Schafer wrote:
> I'm afraid you are SOL if you want to use stock glibc 2.3 with those old

<cut>

Very nice.

My vote goes for sed'ing a binary. I really don't like the idea of having to 
do things twice such as Glibc twice. Running sed on a binary might be 
considered a dirty hack, but personally I don't really care about that. 
Whatever is in $LFS/static is only temporary and I don't care what we do to 
the files in there. As long as it runs.

The alternative as I see it would to re-write Bash and comment out the 
function calls to getpwuid. Write out own that returns a false like Glibc 
would do when NSS is unavailable. But that's a lot more work and is it worth 
the effort? I doubt it.



-- 
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list