Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 17 Aug 95 11:40:57 MDT
From:      terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
To:        chuckr@Glue.umd.edu (Chuck Robey)
Cc:        jiho@sierra.net, freebsd-questions@freefall.FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: gnumalloc
Message-ID:  <9508171740.AA12943@cs.weber.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950817132329.3635D-100000@espresso.eng.umd.edu> from "Chuck Robey" at Aug 17, 95 01:26:49 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> If I got this next point wrong, I'm surprised, but I thought Jim was 
> making a case for not having such areaa of non-shared tools, like /slib.
> Nor an /sbin.  Didn't he say he'd link init shared?  I agree on maximal 
> sharing, but I _do_ leave myself an emergency recovery method.  Jim was 
> saying that if he needed an emergency recovery, he'd dump the whole 
> installation and rebuild.  I think that's overkill.

I think you need root level system binaries to the point that /usr *can*
be mounted seperately, even if it isn't the default case.

I didn't get anything from Jim's post that would imply he thought
otherwise, only that the argument of "what if this goes wrong AND
this goes wrong AND this goes wrong..." is complicated to the point
of a reinstall being a better option than worrying about contingencies
to the point of losing sight of the real problem.

Its the case of "don't optimize the boot code" or more colloquailly,
"don't miss the forest for the trees".


					Terry Lambert
					terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9508171740.AA12943>