From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 15 17:38:57 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F5A16A417 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:38:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (trang.nuxi.org [74.95.12.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D73013C480 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:38:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l9FHcRx0002239; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:38:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.org) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l9FHcRq9002238; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:38:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:38:26 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: Yar Tikhiy Message-ID: <20071015173826.GA88628@dragon.NUXI.org> Mail-Followup-To: obrien@freebsd.org, Yar Tikhiy , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <20070901073440.GL85633@comp.chem.msu.su> <46DAFE5C.6070806@freebsd.org> <20070903120353.GH30502@comp.chem.msu.su> <200709261028.43378.jhb@freebsd.org> <20071004022344.GA60878@dragon.NUXI.org> <20071013060138.GA14388@comp.chem.msu.su> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071013060138.GA14388@comp.chem.msu.su> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Useful tools missing from /rescue X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@freebsd.org List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:38:57 -0000 On Sat, Oct 13, 2007 at 10:01:39AM +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 07:23:44PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > I also don't see the need for pgrep - I think needing that says your > > system is running multiuser pretty well. > > First of all, I'd like to point out that /rescue doesn't need to > be as minimal as /stand used to. Now, /rescue is a compact yet > versatile set of essential tools that can help in any difficult > situation when /*bin:/usr/*bin are unusable for some reason, not > only in restoring a broken system while in single-user mode. A .. > As for pgrep+pkill, it can come handy if one has screwed up his > live system and wants to recover it without dropping the system to > single-user. But if we take this just a little bit farther then why don't we go back to a static /[s]bin except for the few things one might need LDAP, etc.. for? That is, what's the purpose in continuing to duplicate /[s]bin into /rescue? /rescue should be just enough to reasonably get a system who's shared libs are messed up working again. /stand was a left-over from installation and not intended to be a sysadmins' savor - it just happened to be because we didn't clean up / after the bits were laid down. > A valid objection to this point is that pgrep's job > can be done with a combination of ps(1) and sed(1), so it's just a > matter of convenience. I guess I'm still having trouble understanding why one would need 'ps' to fix a shared libs issue. Now is a reason to keep adding stuff to /rescue. Also why one would be running 'ps -aux', which is the only way I can think of to get more than one screen of output if a system is in trouble. > The price for it in terms of disk space is next to nothing, and there > are quite useless space hogs in /rescue already (see below on > /rescue/vi.) Considering how few people are skilled in ed(1) these days, we have little choice but include vi. > I won't speak for everyone, but I really like to use fancy shell > commands, particularly during hard times: loops, pipelines, etc. > So I don't have to enter many commands for a single task or browse I guess I'm not creative enough in the ways I've screwed up my systems and needed tools from /rescue. 8-) > > I don't see the purpose of chown - if you have to fall back to /rescue > > you're user 'root' - and you're trying to fix enough so you can use > > standard /*lib & /*bin .. > Having /rescue/chown is just a matter of completeness of the ch* > subset of /rescue tools because chown's job can't be done by any > other stock tools. If /rescue is complete enough, one can find > more applications for it. E.g., the loader, a kernel, and /rescue /rescue wasn't intended to be well orthogonal. /rescue was part of he corner stone of the deal to switch to shared /[s]bin. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)