"Day Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> [...]
> You clipped my post before the rant.

Actually, I try to clip the rants (search on "quoting") as well, as that
reduces the message size about 95%.

> I noted that anyone who really knows Linux could prolly do it.

No, you wrote: "With Linux, maybe because of the more powerful os, when it
crashes it has been impossible to remount the drive with another distro to
recover my own work on it." The closest you came to "prolly" was "For all I
know, there may be ways to remount a crashed Linux drive [...]"

> But I also
> pointed out that a Newbie is clueless when the
> instructions dont work. Of course we should read
> the documentation. But NONE OF THE FIVE BOOKS I HAVE
> ON LINUX discuss this issue.

So maybe try asking something like "none of the five books I have say
anything about rescuing a trashed filesystem. How can it be done?" rather
than stating (and God forbid anyone take it as Gospel) "when it crashes it
has been impossible to remount the drive with another distro to recover my
own work on it."

> The Linux Gurus would
> have us all believe that Linux does not crash in the
> first place, so why would the distro documentation
> make the admission that their fine produce would ever
> do this by including the steps to take when it does?

I don't doubt that you've had frustrations, and I know that Linux can be
intimidating. However, your blind statements make it out to be far worse
than it really is. As to specific distributions, my old RedHat 5.1 manual
refers to a file on CD that has the full details. You implication that
there's a massive conspiracy to conceal the flaws of Linux is yet more
clueless bluster. There is a WEALTH of information on dealing with
disasters, and I've yet to see ANYONE claim that it's "crash-proof".
"Stable" is not "crash-proof".

>From the RedHat rescue.txt:

--- cut here --- cut here ---
WHAT IS RESCUE MODE?

Rescue mode is a term used to describe a method of booting a small Linux
environment completely from diskettes.

WHY IS THERE A RESCUE MODE?

As the name implies, rescue mode is there to rescue you from something.  In
normal operation, your Red Hat Linux system uses files located on your
system's hard drive to do everything -- run programs, store your files,
etc.

However, there may be times when you are, for one reason or another, unable
to get Linux running completely enough to access its files on your system's
hard drive.  By using rescue mode, it's possible to access the files stored
on your system's hard drive, even if you can't actually *run* Linux from
that hard drive.
[... etc ...]
--- cut here --- cut here ---

> Until the distro documentation admits that disastrous
> crashes do occur, and so far the PR is that it never
> does, then there will not be any of the documentation
> you refer to available to them where they know how to
> find it.

You mean other than to hide the details of rescue under a heading in the
index? You mean other than to describe rescue mode in detail as RedHat does
in the example (a few years old) noted above?  Besides the dozens of
websites? What PR says it never crashes? Day, this is not another massive
government conspiracy to make you feel inadequate. There is not a secret
society of University geeks who produce open source software just to taunt
you.

> I have posted on the issue on Mandrake and
> Linux lists about how to recover material off a crashed
> Linux drive with another distro, and Bob, the silence
> is deafening. You are the first one to say that it could
> be done, but I note you dont tell me what tools I need
> to do it with. I have run e2fsck, and when that did not
> work I was left without a clue.

I didn't TELL you because you've yet to ASK! That's the problem! You simply
make incorrect statements. You have an aversion to anything not DOS, and
you're determined to make it out to be far to complex for mere mortals
because YOU don't get it. The section in the RedHat text says EXACTLY what
to do to prepare a rescue disk. The dozens of web pages I find by searching
Google for "linux rescue" say EXACTLY what to do. Depending what is wrong,
e2fsck (akin to chkdsk) may not even be required.

> Take the example of Netscape vs Arachne. Arachne is not
> on a 'hidden' directory. It tells the user what the name
> of the Bookmark file is [hotlist.htm], and it is simple
> for any user to copy and/or edit that file on that or
> any other drive and paste it into any newer release.

Jeezus, you make it sound like "hidden" is "encrypted" in some way. Hidden
files just keep a lot of the clutter out of view, they aren't meant as some
unstoppable security measure. And I don't know why Netscape did that that
way, why'd they do it under Windows? What's Netscape have to do with Linux
as an operating system?

> Why is Netscape a hidden directory? what are the names
> of the bookmark, addies, and pending email. It seems to
> be obvious that it is sysad mentality; they dont want the
> terminal users on a network to be messing with it. Which
> is fine for them, but sux for the single user home system.
> Which is yet another example of the problem with Linux: it
> is organized around multi-tasking multi-user functionality,
> and for the single user it adds inconvenient complexity.

You obviously don't know the history of Netscape. It was hardly a Linux
development.

> Hopefully someone will bring out a distro that asks up
> front, before anything else, if it is for a PERSONAL PC.
> And hopefully someone will include the macros to copy
> personal prefs, settings, data, and whatnot from the old
> to the new distro.

You forgot the step about making it look EXACTLY like DOS.

> When you did this with DOS BBS Termcomms and offline mail
> readers, the macros were there to do it with. Is there a
> macro system like this for Opera? Again, your silence on
> this missing functionality that dos users were used to
> speaks, just as it does on usenet alt.linux and mandrake,
> and at http://www.linuxquestions.org

Dude, I don't USE Opera! I haven't chimed in with solutions for bookmarks
and e-mail setting becuase (surprise) there's more than one way to do
things, and I use other tools. I haven't seen you actually ASK about Linux
disk recovery here previously. You cite a couple of examples of DOS software
that did imports, I can cite plenty that had NO real interoperability... but
that's NOT a DOS limitation. 30 seconds of searching turns up plenty of
bookmark sync capabilties between browsers on different platforms. There are
plenty of packages out there that sync stuff between browsers, maybe one of
those will work.

> You charge me with being lazy, and perhaps I am, but I
> see, given the lack of response, that I have plenty of
> company.

No, I don't fault ANYONE for being lazy. I rather admire lazy people. It's
folks who spout incorrect information repeatedly, and make little or no
effort to verify that they're correct that annoy the hell out of me. If
you'd start with "how do I?" rather than "Linux can't", we'd be conversing
in far different tones.

> OTOH, I am not interested in making a career
> as a Linux guru. I would like to see Linux thrive, but
> if it is to do so, this elitist bullshit has got to be
> cut back some, and they will havta admit that crashes do
> happen, and suggest where to get the tools to deal with
> that.

Grr. You've chosen to ignore the wealth of information out there. Who's the
elitist here? For Linux to succeed, I'd counter that efforts to convert
hardcore whiners should be abandoned, and all efforts made to concentrate on
the commercial arena where money is to be made. Your unwillingness to learn
has nothing to do with the merit of the software.

> Is there an equivalent to NDD for Linux?

Hey! A question! Alright, I don't know NDD to give you a rundown of
features, but the first hit from a search for "linux disk recovery" on
Google turned up http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=193 ("Disk
Maintenance Under Linux" from the excellent Linux Journal), which gives a
good overview for those with some technical abilities (presumably anyone
doing disk repairs will fit this category.)

Depending on your specific problem, there can be a number of ways to mount
the drive and recover files:

1. Preparation. DO create the rescue diskette during the install process.
Although recovery can still be done without it, the rescue diskette provides
a bootable kernel that matches the config on your hard drive. Always good to
have a backup. DO bother to note those partitions that YOU defined during
the installation. I've always kept meticulous notes on things like drive
parameters going back to my ESDI disk days on DOS, so I consider this second
nature. If you didn't write down the info on the many screens it probably
was shown during the install, print out /etc/fstab, or do "mount -la" before
disaster strikes. This tells you what partitions various parts of your
system exist on.

2. Many times, booting a rescue floppy or CD will allow you to mount the
unbootable hard drive. As you noted, the exact partition necessary depends
on what YOU defined during the install. Some rescue-specific tools do mount
every Linux partition they find. You might seek something like this out for
ease of use. If you've simply botched an edit of /etc/lilo.conf (or
forgotten to edit it), or a driver, that may be all that's required to get
to the drive to make the fix. Copy or edit the file as necessary, and off
you go.

3. In more severe cases when actual damage may have occcurred, it may be
necessary to run fsck, again from your rescue disk. If all goes well, doing
"fsck <partition>" may suffice, and fsck does a good job of repairing
things. If the damage is more severe, you may have to use more advanced fsck
options, just as with chkdsk under DOS.

4. In cases where the damage is severe, the best you may be able to hope for
is to mount the damaged partition and copy files off to a good filesystem.
Again, a rescue disk is a lifesaver (just like with DOS). Fortunately, the
ext2 and other Linux filesystems commonly in use store critical disk
information, so if the file data is intact, your odds are good for recovery.
There's no single FAT-like critical area, but of course hardware CAN fail
catastrophically.

Obviously, there's LOTs more detail but this gives a nutshell overview. If
you TRULY are after more detail, I'll be happy to provide more links and
info that I'm aware of. I'm sure others will too.

> Routine in dos documentation are typical samples. When
> I do man mount, I get the format all right, but trying
> to look up every single option to see if it is one that
> I need is a tedious pain in the ass.
> # mount -t msdos /dev/hdc /hdc
> kept not working telling me it was too many filesystems
> or some such. What was lacking in the example, which a
> dos version would have been is:
> # mount -t msdos /dev/hdcx /hdc

Keep in mind, YOU specify the partitions (i.e. /dev/hdc1 for /) when you
installed the system. There's no one way to put things. When installing ANY
new system (DOS, Windows or Linux), keeping notes on things like drive
configurations, driver parameters etc. is always a good idea. Not to say
it's "intuitive", but I would expect that knowing the basics now, you
probably wouldn't get stuck as badly again. "mount -la" will show you the
info as well, assuming the system is up and running.

I do have to ask though: Was all of this actually on an MSDOS partition?

> note that the 'x' is a required integer referring to the
> partition on that drive. neither man nor info told me
> that, I just stumbled onto it using fdisk.

"mount -la" will show you the info as well, assuming the system is up and
running. Again, "preparation".

> So, sure the information newbies need is there Bob; the
> question is, is it where they can find it?

They can ask, they can search, they can read. I'm not saying it's
necessarily going to pop out at them, but I do say it's a bit presumptuous
to start spewing about limitations when you clearly don't know the whole
story.

> This is not
> at all unexpected. Linux has been in the domain of the
> comp sci geeks and is now trying to expand into markets
> for ordinary users, and the documentation has a long
> way to go before it gets as well organized as DRDOS is.

Your chip on your shoulder regarding academics has made you into a bit of
elitist yourself, you know? Linux is gaining widespread acceptance, even in
Government. If those users can handle it, surely others can. There a bit
more to Linux than a bare DRDOS install. The information still isn't down to
the level that Grandma will be using it without help, but there's hardly a
closed circle of information sources being held by white frocked priests. It
can be found with a bit of effort.

> Thinking back to the early 80's the same thing was going
> on, where the instructions at hand no where near met the
> real needs of ordinary personal users. And again, it was
> for the same reason. The vast majority of the first PCs
> were sold to businesses who had computer professionals
> on hand to deal with the problems.

If only we'd had the web and online cd-based documentation back then, eh?

> My dogeared copy of DRDOS 6 User Guide is only 666 pages
> for an operating system that everyone will agree is not
> nearly as powerful and complex as any distro. Yet none
> of the three distro user guides I have is 400 pages, and
> the other books run 250 and 350. So how complete could any
> of them possibly be?

You need to consider the several THOUSAND pages of documentation typically
included on CD though, Day. Yeah, I well remember having bookshelves full of
unused, duplicate copies of documentation for DOS software, 1/3 of which
seemed to be licensing info and "Quick Start: insert diskette in A: type
stuff." I don't think it's a shortcoming that Linux doesn't ship in a 40lb
box full of quickly outdated printed documentation. Current versions
as-shipped are on CD, and the latest available right off the web. And if you
want telephonic support, you can buy a distribution with that included for
less than you probably paid for DOS not too many years ago.

- Bob

To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
More info can be found at;
http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html

Reply via email to