* Stefan Beke <[email protected]> [2011-12-16 10:57]: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:26, Henning Brauer <[email protected]> wrote: > > it is completely beyond me why some people accept anything else. > Because it fits their needs.
util something breaks and trey notice that they're doomed and whine, yes. > Sometimes would be preferable just to force fix of all inode errors > and then continue booting. as if an fsck would be the only case that ever required manual intervention. > > yes yes, some/many providers don't offer any. so pick one that does. > Traveling to serverhousing twice a year was cheaper in my scenario. cheap cheap cheap cheap cheap sure, if you give shit about availability (pregnancy, diseases) use remote servers without console access (holey condoms). but don't blame anybody but yourself then. > > you don't buy condoms with holes either, no matter how cheap. > Not good analogy. But then, analogy is never good. This one has > especially big holes in it. it is actually excellent, you just don't like it. the bitten... -- Henning Brauer, [email protected], [email protected] BS Web Services, http://bsws.de, Full-Service ISP Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services. Dedicated Servers, Root to Fully Managed Henning Brauer Consulting, http://henningbrauer.com/
