Igor Peshansky wrote:
I'm sure Yaakov meant that he'll patch it when he next gets around to it,
but in the meantime felt compelled to explain where the current directory
structure came from.
---
Why fix it if it isn't broken? It's that way on linux. All of the
mkfs extensions and fsck ex
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Bryan D. Thomas wrote:
> >> Also in the package is the /usr/sbin directory with nothing in it.
> >
> > That's a flaw in the source's 'make install', which is not automake
> > based. The util-linux source provides several /usr/sbin commands as
> > well, but none of them are rel
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 09:55:07PM -0700, Bryan D. Thomas wrote:
>>>Also in the package is the /usr/sbin directory with nothing in it.
>>
>>That's a flaw in the source's 'make install', which is not automake
>>based. The util-linux source provides several /usr/sbin commands as
>>well, but none of
>> Also in the package is the /usr/sbin directory with nothing in it.
>
> That's a flaw in the source's 'make install', which is not automake based.
> The util-linux source provides several /usr/sbin commands as well, but
> none of them are relevant to Cygwin and are not built; the makefiles
> c
Jerry D. Hedden wrote:
I noticed that the util-linux module places several apps in /sbin.
This is how the util-linux source package installs them, see also:
http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_contents.pl?searchmode=filelist&word=util-linux&version=testing&arch=i386
Also in the package
I noticed that the util-linux module places several apps in /sbin.
Tue Mar 7 23:34:41 2006 12800 sbin/agetty.exe
Tue Mar 7 23:34:37 2006 9728 sbin/fsck.cramfs
Tue Mar 7 23:34:37 2006 20992 sbin/fsck.minix
Tue Mar 7 23:34:41 2006 26624 sbin/h
6 matches
Mail list logo
