From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Mar 3 8:41:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from androcles.com (androcles.com [204.57.240.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1A8137B71D for ; Sat, 3 Mar 2001 08:41:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from alex@androcles.com) Received: (from dhh@localhost) by androcles.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f23GfJU00788; Sat, 3 Mar 2001 08:41:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20010302105521.A29174@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2001 08:41:18 -0800 (PST) From: "Duane H. Hesser" To: Brooks Davis Subject: Re: KERNCONF instead of KERNEL? Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG, nickhead@folino.com, dcs@newsguy.com, Bob Johnson Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG nextboot(8) might be a useful part of a remote upgrade strategy. On 02-Mar-01 Brooks Davis wrote: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 01:52:33PM -0500, Bob Johnson wrote: >> You can't reboot to single user mode when you are doing a remote >> update. He is specifically asking about the best way to do >> a remote update. You have to do everything multiuser and accept >> the risk, but there is still the question of what order minimizes >> the risk. > > The give one is it. It's going to be pretty easy to talk a NOC monkey > through booting the system on the old kernel, but damn near impossiable > to get them through recovering a system with a busted kernel and a > userland that won't work with the old one. > > -- Brooks > > -- > Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. > PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 -------------- Duane H. Hesser dhh@androcles.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message