| 1 |
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 15:10, Joost Roeleveld <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 01 June 2011 11:52:25 Pandu Poluan wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 03:35, Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> > On Tuesday 31 May 2011 21:02:46 Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > I see. In my head it is as if we're going against the udev principle of |
| 6 |
>> > populating required device nodes. If udev does not start, isn't it time |
| 7 |
>> > to head for the nearest LiveCD, or must we ensure that every breakage |
| 8 |
>> > is fixable in single-user mode? |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> There are cases for each, but I personally prefer going single-user. |
| 11 |
>> Especially when working on virtualized servers. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> +1 |
| 14 |
> Even though with virtualized servers, using Xen, it's possible to access the |
| 15 |
> filesystem easily from the host. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Well, in my case, the servers ran as VMs on top of VMware in my Cloud |
| 19 |
Provider's infrastructure... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
No consoling into the hypervisor, understandably. And even worse: |
| 22 |
Can't attach the virtual hard disk to another live VM. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Either I have to boot with a LiveCD, or go into single-user. The |
| 25 |
former took quite some time to boot, so I really prefer the latter. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Rgds, |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Pandu E Poluan |
| 30 |
~ IT Optimizer ~ |
| 31 |
Visit my Blog: http://pepoluan.posterous.com |
Archives