From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Jul 10 18:38:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from sgi04-e.std.com (sgi04-e.std.com [199.172.62.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D461E37B403 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:38:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kwc@world.std.com) Received: from world.std.com (world-f.std.com [199.172.62.5]) by sgi04-e.std.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA40157239; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:38:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kwc@localhost) by world.std.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA28255; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:38:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:38:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth W Cochran Message-Id: <200107110138.VAA28255@world.std.com> To: "Drew Derbyshire" Subject: Re: Tracking -stable remotely/colocated Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <200107100227.WAA25392@world.std.com> <200107101450.KAA24607@world.std.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >From: "Drew Derbyshire" >To: "Kenneth W Cochran" >Cc: >Subject: Re: Tracking -stable remotely/colocated >Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:41:13 -0400 > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kenneth W Cochran" >> But there are likely other things I'm interested >> in getting installed/updated on that machine besides security >> fixes. Granted, security fixes should/would be high-priority, >> but tracking -stable & cvs-all might indicate something I want. :) > > >It sounds like you haven't done this remotely before, so True... >... don't change stuff you "might want" on your first >remote production system. Put only changes you absolutely >NEED on it, and always test the install process via sshd on >more accessible (local) machine first. You blow a remote >update badly enough, you're to going need that console >access real bad because you'll be missing a network service >or disk mount. I always test locally anyway... :) And I devoutly RTFM... :) >(I wouldn't put changes I "might want" on my second or >third remote production systems either, but that's me.) > >If you think I'm trying to scare the out of you, I am. :-) > Well, maybe... But I've Been Bitten In the A** by computers before (lotsa bullet-holes...) so I do have the heebie-jeebies wrt remote maintenance. But it appears to me that it'd be the same regardless of the OS I"m using... >> "STABLE Releases?" ?? > >As opposed to the first release off the 5.x branch. I >think a JKH e-mail labeled 5.0 for "early adopters". Hehe, I'm not running 5 yet even in test... :) >[...] >> Hmmm, so in that case, what would be the difference between single-user >> mode & "multiuser" with lotsa daemons shut-down? > >I don't *think* kernel behavior changes (someone correct me >here!) as you go single user, so the answer is not much. Need to do more research... >Sounds like the only two extra things you may want running >are named and sshd And maybe not even named... Especially if I choose to do everything by ip-address... Some kind of Handbook or other documentation would be Real Nice Here... >-ahd- -kc To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message