From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 24 22:24:19 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7149716A421 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 22:24:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from john.destefano@gmail.com) Received: from qproxy.gmail.com (qproxy.gmail.com [72.14.204.201]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAB643D49 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 22:24:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from john.destefano@gmail.com) Received: by qproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id a39so354028qbd for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:24:18 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=T+6S6jzitQsLlfQEqlfB9Pb5+VE6aoKzvTQw5Iwbq38OSLfm7hm4jkmphQmOhS7A88TvzrzoLYGWDJMlTz1cV7GaM57qty0eaVwTipU334QZ2s/BahbGU6d4AE2rqIjG8+X+lcmQ+z/N7JUc1yIa0iZuPS4rY9hyodeWnRPD8p4= Received: by 10.65.112.4 with SMTP id p4mr819502qbm; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:24:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.154.4 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:24:18 -0400 From: John DeStefano To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: updating in single-user mode X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 22:24:19 -0000 When updating world, section 20.4.5 of the handbook calls for dropping to single user mode. The reasons given for this make sense. But this is a problem for me: my BSD server does not have a local K/V/M setup connected directly to it; it sits on my network and I connect to it via PuTTy for administration. Is there a way to achieve single-user mode while still being able to connect remotely (via LAN)? (I know that's something of an oximoron, but I needed to ask) And if not, am I losing any serious features/functionality of the update process by _not_ dropping into single user? Thanks, ~John