Tiny Core Linux
Tiny Core Base => TCB Bugs => Topic started by: jls on November 20, 2009, 09:50:39 AM
-
If mydata.tgz is in the tce dir but I want my backup to be restored from another place, I write restore=sda1 (4 example) in the append line in grub, but still the backup is restored from the one in the tce dir
-
Yikes! Having multiple copies of such a critical file is scary.
But, OK. I will accomodate.
Be careful.
-
I like the fact that most boot options will override what is found by auto-detections. This will be a good feature. :o
-
Historically, the restore option intended use was solely to prevent auto detection.
Later the default location of the tce came in use and thus it too prevents auto detection.
Currenly tce dir trumps the verb restore for the purpose of keeping things simple (KISS).
However restore can trump, with the caveat, that user error does not halt the boot process. Thereby the chance to overwrite the wrong multiple copy of backup is possible, of which I was trying to prevent.
-
Done. Will be in v2.6 starting with rc3.
-
Historically, the restore option intended use was solely to prevent auto detection.
Later the default location of the tce came in use and thus it too prevents auto detection.
Currenly tce dir trumps the verb restore for the purpose of keeping things simple (KISS).
However restore can trump, with the caveat, that user error does not halt the boot process. Thereby the chance to overwrite the wrong multiple copy of backup is possible, of which I was trying to prevent.
Robert now that 2.6rc4 has changed the backup restore precedence are there failure conditions or any other "special" circumstances that will result in backup restore not occurring as expected?
-
Back in the days, when data processing was a widely used term, there was this axiom.
If a file exists with the same name in two different places, then in inevitably the wrong one will be updated.
So that is my reason for caution.
-
Back in the days, when data processing was a widely used term, there was this axiom.
If a file exists with the same name in two different places, then in inevitably the wrong one will be updated.
So that is my reason for caution.
OTOH, I could see a way where this could add safety, by allowing a user to experiment without worrying about accidentally overwriting his/her basic setup (...done it more than once :). Bootcodes offer a great way to simply script in multiple setups; probably nothing general users would mess with anyway.