xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Debian XFS boot image at markybob.com

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Debian XFS boot image at markybob.com
From: Ethan Benson <erbenson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:49:21 -0900
In-reply-to: <20021209215131.GA9333@xxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-copies-to: nobody
Mail-followup-to: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <news2mail-slrnav67u7.n7j.gurubert-dated-1039343472.lheeicjo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3DF33E8D.2090201@xxxxx> <20021209154141.GB15645@xxxxxxxxxx> <20021209205241.GC10532@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20021209215131.GA9333@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 04:51:31PM -0500, George Georgalis wrote:
> 
> yes, accept in this case it looks as if /sbin/xfsrestore would have
> fixed my / quickly and easily, however it was easier to rebuild the os
> than to get xfsrestore on a running xfs compatible rescue image.
> 
> In retrospect, I think it makes good sense to keep fs repair tools
> on both /sbin and /usr/sbin no need to link -s /usr/sbin/xfsrestore
> /sbin/xfsrestore when cp can save your arse.

no that makes no sense at all, if / is hosed your box won't boot, if
you don't have a rescue disk with xfs_repair (or whatever fsck goes
with the filesystem your using) your a loon.

xfsrestore would not have helped you anyway, unless you had a dump of
/ handy.  xfs_repair has no symlinks in /usr (neither should
dump/restore, Nate just did that because his original packages were
broken and put them in /usr, he just didn't want to break anyones
scripts when fixing it).

-- 
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/

Attachment: pgpyO3tyLeFdM.pgp
Description: PGP signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>