| Autor |
Nachricht |
|
|
Titel: get rid of remove-kernel-completely if you still have it
 Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 21:31 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 21. Jan 2006
Beiträge: 185
|
|
Not sure how old it is, but if you still have it, get rid of it before you type it by mistake instead of the alternative command "remove-all-kernels-completely". If you do, you won't notice that it deleted a bunch of files until you reboot the next time and it can't find any kernel modules to load...whoops 
BTW, if you do this, boot using a Kanotix live image (I also had to do a vgscan; vgchange -ay because I'm running LVM), download the latest kernel and reinstall it and you'll be fine... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Titel: get rid of remove-kernel-completely if you still have it
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 21:37 Uhr
|
|
Team Member
Anmeldung: 06. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 3087
Wohnort: berlin
|
|
remove-kernel-completely removes your booted kernel, whereas remove-all-kernels-completely removes all, but the booted one.
greetz
devil |
_________________
<<We are Xorg - resistance is futile - you will be axximilated>>
Host/Kernel/OS "devilsbox" running[2.6.19-rc1-git5-kanotix-1KANOTIX-2006-01-RC4 ]
CPU Info AMD Athlon 64 3000+ clocked at [ 803.744 MHz ]
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel: RE: get rid of remove-kernel-completely if you still have it
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 22:00 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 21. Jan 2006
Beiträge: 185
|
|
Why would you want to remove your booted kernel?
Removing all the others except the one you're using makes more sense IMHO  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel: RE: get rid of remove-kernel-completely if you still have it
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 22:15 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Nov 2005
Beiträge: 112
Wohnort: Venezuela
|
|
name suggestions:
remove-kernel-completely -> remove-active-kernel # remove booted kernel
remove-all-kernels-completely -> remove-all-other-kernels # removes all but the active |
_________________
kanotix-2006-01, 2.6.18.5-slh-up-1, IceWM, Krusader; P4, 2.8GHz, 512MB
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 22:23 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 25. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 2133
|
|
| It's s quite simple: Don't boot it if you want to give it the boot. |
_________________
And I ain't got no worries 'cause I ain't in no hurry at all (Doobie Brothers, "Black Water").
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 22:41 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Aug 2004
Beiträge: 1905
|
|
Sollen wir nebenbei noch "rm", "dd", "cat", "mkfs", "dpkg", "apt-get" etc. umbenennen?
--
Edit: sorry language multitasking is confusing...
<<Should we rename "rm", "dd", "cat", "mkfs", "dpkg", "apt-get" etc. as well?>>
I agree that some naming conventions could have been more fortunate, but I don't see an immediate reason to act either. |
Zuletzt bearbeitet von slh am 13.08.2006, 23:25 Uhr, insgesamt ein Mal bearbeitet
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 22:56 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 05. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 414
Wohnort: Auckland, New Zealand
|
|
Well, "remove-all-kernels-completely" would logically imply the all kernels, including the current one, would be removed.
May be better to rename:
"remove-all-kernels-completely" to "remove-all-old-kernels-completely"
and rename:
"remove-kernel-completely" to "remove-current-kernel-completely" |
_________________
Linux is evolution, not intelligent design - Linus Torvalds
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 23:07 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
yes, of all the kanotix scripts, those two are the most confusingly named. I asked repeatedly about remove all kernels completely since that was not what I wanted to do.
Swynndia's names make sense, and would prevent future unfortunate errors caused by unclear naming. However, this feature is probably the next misc tweak item I'm adding to my script, with a full text explanation of the consequences of the chosen action, so at least for script users it won't be confusing.
Actually, to make it clear, the names could be:
1. remove-current-kernel-completely
2. remove-all-non-current-kernels-completely
because it's actually the non current, not the old, kernels, that are removed, at least if I understand that right. |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 23:12 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 30. Jan 2005
Beiträge: 259
Wohnort: Wiesbaden
|
|
In the states it is necessary to explain totally all and everything "kiddy-safely".
Example: If you sell a hot coffee, you have to explain to the buyer who bought a hot coffee that the coffee bought as hot, might be hot (what a surprise!)!
In Europe the people know that, as they expect they get what they buy!
mylo
p. s.: If you sell a coffee in the states in any case you have a problem! Either its to hot or cold you risk to pay there millions of dollars...
mylo |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 23:18 Uhr
|
|
Team Member
Anmeldung: 03. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 1544
Wohnort: out there somewhere
|
|
McFact 1
For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.
McFact No. 2:
McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.
McFact No. 3:
The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.
McFact No. 4:
The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.
McFact No. 5:
A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn't think it was possible.
McFact No. 6:
After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales, McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of 1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling 1 billion cups each year.)
McFact No. 7:
On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.
McFact No. 8:
A report in Liability Week, September 29, 1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap. Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years.
Note--the rewards was also reduced 30% due to the fault of the victom in contributing to the damage--ie, her responsibility was taken into account, but it did not completely nullify McDonalds responsibility to sell a SAFE product. |
_________________
h2's d-u script
h2's rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 13.08.2006, 23:32 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Aug 2004
Beiträge: 1905
|
|
| Would you like ice cubes served with your coffee? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 00:06 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
mylo, this has nothing to do with the states, it's a simple oversight in script naming, most kanotix scripts have extremely clear names, wonderfully clear, where the name gives the function accurately, and with very little ambiguity.
There is a large difference between constructive and unconstructive criticism. If the script did what it was called, your system would finish the script with no kernels installed. The word 'all' has only one meaning in english, it means all, each, every, without exception. There is no other meaning for that term, which is why I avoid using it as much as possible, since it's so absolute.
Oh, richard, sorry, I missed you posting, your suggestion is even less ambiguous, those are even better and more clear names.
Anyway, not a big deal, except for the highly critical nature of removing kernels, so to me, obviously you want the scripts that do that action to be as unambiguously named as possible. I do know that of the major kanotix scripts, this is one of the few that I was not able to remember without looking it up each time because the name of the script does not correspond to the action of the script. |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 00:41 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 05. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 414
Wohnort: Auckland, New Zealand
|
|
Indeed, kanotix comes with no guarantees at all, install at your own risk  |
_________________
Linux is evolution, not intelligent design - Linus Torvalds
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 04:30 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 21. Jan 2006
Beiträge: 185
|
|
Yep, renaming this script would definitely help...sounds like others think the current naming is also confusing
Does anyone ever delete the current kernel? I'm wondering why anyone would do that.
Also, as a side note, remove-all-kernels-completely always seems to leave behind the headers...I modified mine to remove the old headers too |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 07:19 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 03. Jul 2004
Beiträge: 525
|
|
What modification to the script to remove the headers?
drb |
_________________
Kernel 2.6.21-slh-up-7
_____________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 08:26 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 17. Dez 2003
Beiträge: 700
Wohnort: Berlin
|
|
|
Zitat:
Does anyone ever delete the current kernel? I'm wondering why anyone would do that.
Why not? You boot this kernel and realize it doesn't work as expected -> remove it.
Ciao Martin |
_________________
omnia vincit pecunia
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 19:02 Uhr
|
|
Team Member
Anmeldung: 03. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 1544
Wohnort: out there somewhere
|
|
|
slh hat folgendes geschrieben::
Would you like ice cubes served with your coffee?
No thank you, a straw would be better and what I usually use when traveling
remove-all-kernels-completely
No need to change the name, get to know what the commands do, BEFORE you use them, again, this all boils down to understanding what you are doing before doing it. (read slh's post:Sollen wir nebenbei noch "rm", "dd", "cat", "mkfs", "dpkg", "apt-get" etc. umbenennen?
I always use command myself, but I usually wait a couple days so if something does go wrong I have another kernel to boot too. |
_________________
h2's d-u script
h2's rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 21:35 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Nov 2005
Beiträge: 112
Wohnort: Venezuela
|
|
The problem is not learning obscure commands, but rather the syntax.
It is inaccurate. LIke naming the command for save to be "delete".
"Remove-all-kernels-completely" means, remove all kernels and their headers and leave the machine inoperable. |
_________________
kanotix-2006-01, 2.6.18.5-slh-up-1, IceWM, Krusader; P4, 2.8GHz, 512MB
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 22:31 Uhr
|
|
Developer
Anmeldung: 25. Sep 2004
Beiträge: 293
|
|
Just take it or leave it!
That one got that name, i hope it will remain with that name....if you dont like rename it on your own system.
There is no rule on how to name a script... |
_________________
Why do strong arms fatigue themselves with frivolous dumbbells?
To dig a vineyard is worthier exercise for men.
Marcus Valerius Martialis
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 23:22 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 05. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 414
Wohnort: Auckland, New Zealand
|
|
|
piper hat folgendes geschrieben::
No need to change the name, get to know what the commands do, BEFORE you use them, again, this all boils down to understanding what you are doing before doing it. (read slh's post:Sollen wir nebenbei noch "rm", "dd", "cat", "mkfs", "dpkg", "apt-get" etc. umbenennen?
Yes, "rm", "dd", "cat", "mkfs", "dpkg", "apt-get" etc have names aren't all that meaningful, but the difference here is they all have man pages.
Where is the documentation for "Remove-all-kernels-completely" and "Remove-kernel-completely"? Maybe it exists, but I've never found it. So how am I meant to know what I'm doing before I run the commands? |
_________________
Linux is evolution, not intelligent design - Linus Torvalds
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 14.08.2006, 23:49 Uhr
|
|
Team Member
Anmeldung: 03. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 1544
Wohnort: out there somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 15.08.2006, 00:22 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 01. Feb 2006
Beiträge: 128
Wohnort: SF Bay area
|
|
It's certainly good idea to know what a command does before using it! However, with this one, it's easy to make an error especially if one didn't know that there are two similarly named commands on the system.
Using the wrong one, "remove-kernel-completely" does remove kernel modules or at least causes them not to be inserted on boot. One can still recover from this by booting into CLI and getting/installing the latest kernel. How do I know? Hehehe, I'm not telling! 
Regards,
Ron |
_________________
To whom much is given, much shall be required.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 15.08.2006, 00:28 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Nov 2005
Beiträge: 112
Wohnort: Venezuela
|
|
http://kanotix.com/index.php?module=pnW ... nelCleanup
And here, this script is called simultaneously,
"remove-all-kernels" and "remove-all-kernels-completely".
Which should be the proper name?
"remove-all-kernels" means to remove all kernels. It implies that the box is without a kernel. "remove-all-kernels-completely" implies that, although I said remove all kernels, this time I really mean it --remove all of them, completely! This script is probably useful to kernel developers.
Let me know if the concensus is to use correct syntax and I'll be happy to update the text.
Anybody can create symlinks to correct errors in the operating system,
but it is supposedly in the interest of the distribution to be precise in meanings.
It should not be necessary to argue for using proper syntax with programmers, whose very being depends on precise syntax. |
_________________
kanotix-2006-01, 2.6.18.5-slh-up-1, IceWM, Krusader; P4, 2.8GHz, 512MB
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 15.08.2006, 02:00 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 17. Dez 2003
Beiträge: 16792
|
|
| I think you all dislike my naming scheme |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 15.08.2006, 03:08 Uhr
|
|
Team Member
Anmeldung: 03. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 1544
Wohnort: out there somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
