| 1 |
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 20:00:51 +0100 |
| 2 |
Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 04-01-2012 19:50:24 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:12:18 +0100 |
| 6 |
> > Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > > >>>>> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 9 |
> > > |
| 10 |
> > > >> What mistakes? |
| 11 |
> > > |
| 12 |
> > > > The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a |
| 13 |
> > > > rule of thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and |
| 14 |
> > > > hacking packages just to make it work. |
| 15 |
> > > |
| 16 |
> > > There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation. |
| 17 |
> > > The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root |
| 18 |
> > > filesystem must be adequate to boot, restore, recover, and/or |
| 19 |
> > > repair the system." |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > Why don't we have sshd there then? I don't really feel like |
| 22 |
> > repairing remote system without fallback sshd. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Network isn't typically in that bootlevel. You'd just attach through |
| 25 |
> the console (netmgt, ipmi, keyboard/vga) instead. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> > And a compiler. If I mess up some important system component, I'd |
| 28 |
> > really use one. And package manager. And backup system libraries... |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Time for your PXE boot from net to just bring back a sane image or so. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
My PXE boot from net won't happen because possible /usr-over-NFS relies |
| 33 |
on random files from other rootfs, and they just failed to be in sync |
| 34 |
between two of my systems. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Best regards, |
| 38 |
Michał Górny |
Archives