Re: FS corruption... some help maybe??
Khimenko Victor (khim@sch57.msk.ru)
Fri, 23 Jul 1999 05:11:34 +0400 (MSD)
In <013701bed49d$51f642c0$020aa8c0@artemis.rawbz.dynip.com> Robert Purdy (rpurdy@voyager.co.nz) wrote:
>>> I don't consider a upgrade of any piece of software that does not
>>> belong directly to the kernel as being a system internal. I.E. an
>>> upgrade of an office-package should be no reason at all to reboot
>>> the system. - In fact, where I work, we replaced (updated) the
>>> complete Applixware-package overnight on all our customers
> workstations.
>>> - Hasslefree, without any complains and not a single reboot!
>>>
>>> - after a severe crash: Filesystemschecks - But you only need to go into
>>> singleusermode for that! (Same goes for chancges in the /etc/hosts)
>>>
>>> When you leave these rare and necessary occasions away, what is left?
>>>
>>> Exact the situations, where NT falls over it's own bootstraps.
>>
>>
>>This is the problem. Win95/Win98/WinNT has to be rebooted a dozen times
>>just to install a new software package or piece of hardware. And everyone
>>gets used to the idea that changing anything (dial-up networking, etc)
>>means a "you must now reboot windows for your changes to take effect."
>>
>>Unix/Linux isn't like that...
>>
>>fortunately...
>>
>>
> This maybe a moot point that becomes extinct with the introduction of
> win2000. Rumour has it reboots are down to 5 instead of 50 for various
> changes. (According to PCWorld May 99)
Hmm. This means that there are you can erase opened file ? Since lack of
such ability is source of 90% reboots :-(( BTW old programs will reboot
on installation anyway...
> It will be intresting to see which changes it still has to reboot for.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/