Not on _my_ computers you won't. That's a completely unreliable way of restoring the directory.
Why doesn't someone read the man page for cp? It tells you how not copy /proc.
man cp
Personally, I prefer
tar ... | tar
which seems to work far better for me than cp.
man tar
--
Cheers John
I've had more than a cursory glance at the man pages for cp (TBH, I didn't even think of using tar) but couldn't find any particular reference to /proc files (maybe cos I'm using woody...?). There were plenty of references to "special files" to be warned about (such as never ever use the --copy-contents switch, etc), which I assume includes most of /proc as well as the more exotic parts of /dev, but there weren't any specific references.
Looking at it now with a few examples from Thomas' page, it does look like tar is the best way to do it (if a little more convoluted), but all I've copied so far are the non-special stuff (just user profiles, apps and so on), but am now sorely worried about my procs and devs. What is it about Thomas' makedev line that I should avoid?
I'm quite tempted to switch to GRUB, as I find it's syntax nicer, although I'm used to just using it on IDE systems (under gentoo). I take it all I need to do is supplant hd* for sd*...?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
