Subject: Re: /rescue, crunchgen'ed?
To: Johnny Billquist <email@example.com>
From: Richard Earnshaw <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/30/2002 14:12:16
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > > If you don't agree that a single point of failure makes things less safe
> > > I'm sure NASA would be interested in hearing about your deductive
> > > skills. :-)
> > What makes you think that having lots of separate programs, each of which
> > does different things and cannot represent the functionality of another
> > isn't a single point of failure?
> Let me see...
> echo *
> Hmmm, sure looks like that could be somewhat equivalent to ls...
... a lot of pointless trivial examples
/sbin/init: bad sector
Hmm, don't seem to have a replacement for that one....
fsck, ifconfig, mknod, badsect, ...
I could go on.
If you've got a hosed system then there are MANY critical tools which are
> > As has been pointed out. If you are worried about things like that. Then
> > install several /rescue directories. Better still, do that on several
> > different disks, and arrange your system so that you can boot from any of
> > them in an emergency.
> That is also an option. But /rescue is rather vulnerable, plus I probably
> don't even know if it works until the day I'm going to use it.
So run some tests on it. You are capable of doing that I suppose, you do
know the root password after all.