Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 14:02:39 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Tim Kientzle <kientzle@acm.org> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: /bin and /sbin are now dynamically linked Message-ID: <p06002002bbe7fd7ac23c@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20031124114006.GA60761@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <FPEBKMIFGFHCGLLKBLMMCEDCCDAA.ghelmer@palisadesys.com> <3FBE8D92.6080205@acm.org> <20031123012222.GB11523@dragon.nuxi.com> <p06002003bbe5c0f30237@[10.0.1.2]> <20031123042635.GB677@saboteur.dek.spc.org> <3FC16644.7070005@acm.org> <20031124114006.GA60761@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 3:40 AM -0800 11/24/03, David O'Brien wrote: > >NO. /rescue was allowed in the system to handle the case >of a trashed file in /lib[exec]. To allow a sysadmin to >recover a system from the same type of mishaps they could >before we went to a dynamic /. Not to continue to add >to /rescue until the sysadmin could recover from every >conceivable way of trashing a system. > >/rescue was not to become the all-in-compassing Swiss Army >recover tool. We provide the Live-FS CD (disc 2) for that. Another issue with adding more-and-more to /rescue is that every thing added to /rescue is compiled for it. Which is to say, the time it takes for a buildworld keeps increasing. I just bought one hardware upgrade to get back the time lost from going to GCC 3.x, and I find that the buildworld times are now increasing again due to compiling everything twice for /rescue. I kind of like the idea of having 'vi' available, but I will also admit that I don't need it. All my hardware has CD-ROM drives, and I set up all my systems with multiple (multi-boot) installs of freebsd. If something goes wrong, I like having vi around, but then I also like having bash and ruby (among other things). So, I have dual-boot systems. No matter what you put in /rescue, there are *possible* disaster scenarios where you won't have something you need. For some reason, I manage to hit those every few months. From my experience I have found that it's much better to have multiple separate installs, and that way I can usually fix one install from the other one. Other people will have other hardware, and thus other needs. We should probably make sure it's easy to add some of these programs to /rescue, but I don't think that all of us should have to build all the programs that any one of us feel they might need. I doubt there is any perfect answer which will satisfy everyone, but perhaps we can recognize that and figure out some flexible middle ground. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06002002bbe7fd7ac23c>