Simone Piccardi wrote: > David A. Bandel ha scritto: >> Again, this is just too much trouble. And the install you forgot to dd >> because you only have to do it once? I'd sure like to see the mess >> after you fat-finger a key w/ dd. >> >> dd is the most dangerous command I know -- beats `alias rm='rm -f'` I >> already use it way too often for my liking. >> > I've seen far more machine blocked at boot because someone did an error > with lilo (like the most common of forgetting to run it) then machine > destroyed by a dd.
Probably because the admin didn't know LILO even existed. Sounds like a reason to keep it in to me. Just run lilo when you upgrade the kernel. If it's not installed, no harm done. If it's in use, then you just saved yourself a headache. Seems like a no-brainer to me. I've never lost an OS or lots of important data just because the system didn't boot, only lost 2-5 minutes uptime (Dells take forever to boot). LILO recovery? Simple: 1. If you have other kernels, you can probably still boot from them. Just do so and run lilo and reboot. 2. No other bootable kernel? Boot from another source (network, CD w/ Knoppix), mount the partition, run lilo, reboot. If they don't even know about lilo, they're completely lost. > > And lilo has far more occasions to do an error than just a single dd, > that must be done just one time. > >>> Also grub is written in C, lilo is assembly. I know which one I find >>> easier to maintain and add features to. >>> >> I haven't the time or desire to maintain or add features to lilo, grub, >> or any of a thousand plus other packages. I install the binaries and >> run with them. If I tinker w/ 3 packages a year, that's a lot. > > The problem doesn't lie on what you maintain by yourself, but in how it > can be easy for others to maintain the package. And assembly it's just > much harder to maintain. > >> Lilo needs to stay in the exam. > > This is just your opinion and I strongly disagree. As do I strongly disagree with its removal. > > If you prefer LILO you can just use it, but this is a minority choice, > and I do not think that this is an appropriate topic for a junior > sysadmin exam like LPI 1. Because it is such an important piece of software for a junior admin, it needs to stay. Can't boot, then nothing to admin. > > Otherwise why not require also the knowelegde of the tcsh? I know many > people used to it thinking that it has a nicer syntax than bash... On login, you can change shells easily (I do on occasion). You can't change boot loaders on bootup. David A. Bandel
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
