From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 2 11:43:37 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from beta.root-servers.ch (beta.root-servers.ch [195.49.33.19]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 73CA537B718 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 11:43:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gabriel_ambuehl@buz.ch) Received: (qmail 38501 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 19:43:31 -0000 Received: from dclient106-69.hispeed.ch (HELO work.root.li) (62.2.106.69) by beta.root-servers.ch with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 19:43:31 -0000 Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 20:44:57 +0100 From: Gabriel Ambuehl X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.51) Educational Organization: BUZ Internet Services X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <14312670268.20010302204457@buz.ch> To: Bob Johnson Cc: dcs@newsguy.com, nickhead@folino.com, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re[2]: KERNCONF instead of KERNEL? In-Reply-To: <3A9FEBF1.8C1A5AC4@eng.ufl.edu> References: <3A9FEBF1.8C1A5AC4@eng.ufl.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello Bob, Friday, March 02, 2001, 7:52:33 PM, you wrote: > You can't reboot to single user mode when you are doing a remote > update. He is specifically asking about the best way to do > a remote update. You have to do everything multiuser and accept > the risk, but there is still the question of what order minimizes > the risk. While I'm fully aware that it isn't officially allowed to do multiuser make installworld / installkernel runs, I've been doing it for more than half a year now without (at least 30 times on different machines) any problems except for one time where the box didn't come up anymore because of a screwed kernel. I've done it on servers 20cm away from me as well as on those in our colocation 15min by car from here as well as with them in another colocation which is essentially on the other side of the earth. Other administrative mistakes (mistyped rootshell, accidentally misconfigured firewalls etc) have caused far more downtime for us than any make world stuff. My conclusion: I'm not member of the project but according to my experiences, this risk is acceptable (and for the second colo, I simply haven't got any chance, to do it any other way at the moment). But there IS a possibility to go to single user from remote (although I never actually tested it): use serial console and crossconnect two servers so one can access the other (or use some Portmaster or similar gear). This way, you should be able to go to single user via the other box and then using serial console. Serial console has saved my life several times when there went something wrong (one time, sshd didn't want to come up anymore, for example). Best regards, Gabriel -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.0.2i iQEVAwUBOp/qLMZa2WpymlDxAQH5Xgf/aHdFCzX+vaeM78+9JNnTdFiW67jnTaae eNaeRs6m9nFH1nWDv44SqDhaOWyiraaPAJV8rECZFFNGOeuewT6lHjPYZKQY7Tl8 7cxRbyhwzrB6uHYfndQaurll3482xefQFExiJtMI1cSgtyAUcW8J3OaFipEdasYh +2LM5DxY43kPq4xxAUCs6dtJnNgdEYDn4TCfHFcHfKtUMfxzXcA1RTAFxoysA/Am y44TL6HVI5SAaFZotlP0Um1OfX7FbCf0F3QCGDjsuXJH38so+GZhe2zGSlGzKKIJ CpFEcA1JvxIEE7fUNE28Q65XdtLQwN5JIu9S+6K7jhiSHy5ZMMFkTw== =LEjw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message