Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:55:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Greg Black <gjb-freebsd@gba.oz.au> Cc: "Andrew J. Korty" <ajk@purdue.edu>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Entombing for FreeBSD Message-ID: <199904161955.MAA59781@apollo.backplane.com> References: <199904160332.WAA28377@poynting.physics.purdue.edu> <19990416113734.18605.qmail@alice.gba.oz.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> We think entombing is an elegant solution for a very common problem.
:> It saves users time because it makes most of their mistakes
:> reversible. Systems administrators profit as well, since entombing
:> allows them to avoid the time-consuming task of restoring files
:> from tape. I can't remember the last restore I did!
:
:If we're restricting this to restoring lost files, I can't
:remember the last time I did that either. It was certainly more
:than 15 years ago. I don't use entombing. Can't see the point.
:
:--
:Greg Black <gjb@acm.org>
I've been thinking about this enombing thing... well, I hate to say it,
but crowbaring into libc is *not* the right way to do it. It's
just too intrusive. The right way to do it would be to write a device
driver similar to NULLFS which handles backing up the files, thus giving
the sysad the option to use such a device to mount-through those partitions
that the sysad wants to keep checkpointed. Also, putting such intrusive
code into libc would be fairly dangreous from a security point of view
even if it is turned off.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904161955.MAA59781>