* Michael Stone said: > On Tue, Aug 17, 1999 at 12:56:17AM -0400, Justin Wells wrote: > > #5 -- a hardware error occurs and it corrupts a few files. you > > don't know how extensive the problem is, but libC is > > at least one of the file that's been hosed > > So you copy libc from your backup disk. What's the big deal? Presumably using cp or mv? They are dynamically linked with libc (assuming you don't have sash). Ah, and mount/umount are dynamically linked as well - and I assume you don't keep your backup media mounted all the time. > > > much that can go wrong, and I can't boot over it. > > > 3) A failover machine. Sometimes things really do break. > > > > All three of your points assume that it is OK to reboot. > > Are you intentionally being obstinate? You mount your backup disk > read-only, then you copy what you need off of it. You use your serial HOW do you do that with dynamically linked utilities AND a broken (in ANY way) libc6? > line to do it. The serial line's getty is going to be there regardless And what about the situation when your server is mere 120KM away? [snip] > You're putting too much emphasis on static bins, pure and simple. I've > got machines that don't even have dynamic libs, and let me assure you > that they're not failure-proof. Nobody says static bins make your machine failure-proof. It's just that they make it LESS possible for the machine to fail in a way that requires physical assitance and physical presence at the machine. And if you ever administered a machine which is several hundred km away, then you'll know what I'm talking about. regards marek
Attachment:
pgpN5_7ZZ7ma1.pgp
Description: PGP signature