Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 15:25:26 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/mtree BSD.root.dist src/include paths.h src/rescue Makefile README src/rescue/librescue Makefile src/rescue/rescue Makefile Message-ID: <XFMail.20030701152526.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030701185047.GD67015@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01-Jul-2003 David O'Brien wrote: > On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 02:28:05PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >> No. sysinstall copies over /stand and then chroots into the new root >> for the actual install after it does the newfs. If you don't copy /stand >> then installs will fail. > > Yes, we need a /stand during the install. But not post install. Maybe for your machines, not for some machines I work with that use custom install scripts. :) >> Please just leave it as is. /stand is still >> useful in the scary case that /rescue and normal root get hosed and it >> doesn't take up very much space anyways. > > Feh. Lets also make /bin2 and /sbin2 incase /[s]bin, /rescue, and /stand > get messed up. If you've messed up /[s]bin and /rescue you should give > up and do a binary reinstall. /stand waits space and there is now zero > use for it given /rescue. Oh, wanh: 1.8M /stand This is hardly worth whining over. /rescue and /stand have different purposes and you just can't get over that since you are so used to abusing /stand as a /rescue equivalent and can't understand that /stand has other purposes besides that. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20030701152526.jhb>