On Monday 10 May 2004 13:49, Eben King wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2004, Smitty wrote:
> > On Monday 10 May 2004 11:27, Eben King wrote:
> > > On Sun, 9 May 2004, Smitty wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 09 May 2004 23:31, Eben King wrote:
> >
> > snip
> >
> > > > You are essentially doing it. You use one hard drive for fiddling
> > > > and the other contains the stable binaries.
> > >
> > > Well yeah, that works for mistakes that I discover within one day
> > > (technically, that I discover before 5am). However, if I hadn't
> > > rebooted before the backup ran, I wouldn't have discovered the error,
> > > and the bad modules would've been backed up. What then, boot from an
> > > OS CD, chroot into my system, "rpm -i" a stock kernel and modules, and
> > > then upgrade from there?
> >
> > OK, then you could burn /boot, /etc, /lib, /bin, /sbin, /root and /home
> > to cdrws as often as desired so that you have the critical files in case
> > you hose your system. /usr and /opt could also be burned.
>
> /home's too big, but yeah, I get your point.
You could burn it in slices.
>
> > > That's a good reason to keep at all times a previous kernel + modules.
> >
> > I keep a previous kernel+mods for as long as I have doubts about
> > stability of the current one.
>
> The thing is, everything had been going swimmingly for months, then boom,
> I screwed up. It had a similar effect to "rm -r /lib/modules/2.4.22".
An unusable file system will not boot. Yes, I see the similarity.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:29:30 EDT