Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:38:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth W Cochran <kwc@world.std.com> To: "Drew Derbyshire" <avatar+july2001@kew.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tracking -stable remotely/colocated Message-ID: <200107110138.VAA28255@world.std.com> References: <200107100227.WAA25392@world.std.com> <200107101450.KAA24607@world.std.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From: "Drew Derbyshire" <avatar+july2001@kew.com> >To: "Kenneth W Cochran" <kwc@world.std.com> >Cc: <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> >Subject: Re: Tracking -stable remotely/colocated >Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:41:13 -0400 > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kenneth W Cochran" <kwc@world.std.com> >> But there are likely other things I'm interested >> in getting installed/updated on that machine besides security >> fixes. Granted, security fixes should/would be high-priority, >> but tracking -stable & cvs-all might indicate something I want. :) > ><IMHO> >It sounds like you haven't done this remotely before, so True... >... don't change stuff you "might want" on your first >remote production system. Put only changes you absolutely >NEED on it, and always test the install process via sshd on >more accessible (local) machine first. You blow a remote >update badly enough, you're to going need that console >access real bad because you'll be missing a network service >or disk mount. I always test locally anyway... :) And I devoutly RTFM... :) >(I wouldn't put changes I "might want" on my second or >third remote production systems either, but that's me.) > >If you think I'm trying to scare the <expletive> out of you, I am. :-) ></IMHO> Well, maybe... But I've Been Bitten In the A** by computers before (lotsa bullet-holes...) so I do have the heebie-jeebies wrt remote maintenance. But it appears to me that it'd be the same regardless of the OS I"m using... >> "STABLE Releases?" ?? > >As opposed to the first release off the 5.x branch. I >think a JKH e-mail labeled 5.0 for "early adopters". Hehe, I'm not running 5 yet even in test... :) >[...] >> Hmmm, so in that case, what would be the difference between single-user >> mode & "multiuser" with lotsa daemons shut-down? > >I don't *think* kernel behavior changes (someone correct me >here!) as you go single user, so the answer is not much. Need to do more research... >Sounds like the only two extra things you may want running >are named and sshd And maybe not even named... Especially if I choose to do everything by ip-address... Some kind of Handbook or other documentation would be Real Nice Here... >-ahd- -kc To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200107110138.VAA28255>