David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How about -n (do all the validation you're going to do anyway, but skip > actually doing anything, a la make)? Offhand, dunno whether -n is > already taken for something else, though.
'-n'is already taken, I'm rather thinking of --dry-run like in the 'patch' tool. > I'm mostly concerned with the problem of assessing something that may > already be in place where something "weird" has been done that didn't > make it into zipl.conf for some reason. Sounds like there's no nice way > to do that. Would it make sense to "force" updates into zipl.conf and > gradually remove the cmdline arguments? >From my point of view, I'd say yes. I would suggest using the command line parameters only to prepare a new or broken installation for IPL. If there is a need to test new or different parameters, simply define a new multiboot configuration, experiment with that and get back to the working configuration if anything bad happens. Regards, Peter Oberparleiter -- Peter Oberparleiter Linux on zSeries Development IBM Development Lab, Boeblingen/Germany ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
