Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

Tue, 24 May 2016 16:44:09 +0100 Kevin Chadwick > > [WARNING! Shameless self-promotion below!] > > I have solved my need for read-only OpenBSD in a following manner: > > https://www.mimar.rs/blog/how-to-increase-openbsds-resilience-to-power-outage > > s/ > > write your own

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

> [WARNING! Shameless self-promotion below!] > I have solved my need for read-only OpenBSD in a following manner: > https://www.mimar.rs/blog/how-to-increase-openbsds-resilience-to-power-outage > s/ write your own boot seed... doh! why didn't I think of that already, though I'm still unsure why

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

On Fri, 20 May 2016 03:29:58 +0300 li...@wrant.com wrote: > This is a good ping to revisit the diskless(8) thanks for mentioning > it. While you are at it, please revisit the need for RARP as it doesn't support CIDR. http://openbsd-archive.7691.n7.nabble.com/bootparamd-and-non-default-subnet-m

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

Fri, 20 May 2016 00:44:30 +0200 Jasper Valentijn > OK, diskless(8), Example 7 states: > > Populate myclient's root filesystem on the server. How this is done depends > on the client architecture and the version of the OpenBSD distribution. It > can be as simple as

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

On May 19, 2016 8:36 PM, "Chris Cappuccio" wrote: > > Jasper Valentijn [jasper.valent...@gmail.com] wrote: > > Maybe relevant... > > > > diskless(8), Example 10 states: > > > > If the */usr* partition is to be shared between machines, as in the example > > */etc/exports* above,

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

Jasper Valentijn [jasper.valent...@gmail.com] wrote: > Maybe relevant... > > diskless(8), Example 10 states: > > If the */usr* partition is to be shared between machines, as in the example > */etc/exports* above, a more suitable entry might be: > > myserver:/usr /usr nfs ro 0 0 That is a

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

Maybe relevant... diskless(8), Example 10 states: If the */usr* partition is to be shared between machines, as in the example */etc/exports* above, a more suitable entry might be: myserver:/usr /usr nfs ro 0 0

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

Wed, 18 May 2016 16:21:15 +0100 bytevolc...@safe-mail.net > This was mainly asking for clarification about what's going on; > that's what was given. Clarification provided early in the thread by Theo, and you and others like you insisted on the nonsense, which results in annoying comments. It is

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

li...@wrant.com wrote: > Defending read only file systems on a writable medium is pointless, but > your option, which does not qualify as a bug report. Now read one book. Wrant, calm down and curb the attitude please. You often come up with good stuff here, and there are even things you have

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

Tue, 17 May 2016 19:45:55 +0100 Kevin Chadwick > > > UPS do fail too btw. I had to rip some cheap APC ones out because > > > they caused more downtime than they saved! > > > > Did you just copy paste this line from somewhere? You can't handle a > > battery replacement,

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 07:45:55PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > > > UPS do fail too btw. I had to rip some cheap APC ones out because > > > they caused more downtime than they saved! > > > > Did you just copy paste this line from somewhere? You can't handle a > > battery replacement, and

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

> > UPS do fail too btw. I had to rip some cheap APC ones out because > > they caused more downtime than they saved! > > Did you just copy paste this line from somewhere? You can't handle a > battery replacement, and you're advising read only file system mounts. I sometimes agree with some