Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic

[David Brown]

On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 12:42:29AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:

> Yup.  I've always been struck by the number of times I've seen notes
> posted on the LKML about people having to rebuild their BK archives; I
> don't know if it means there's something fragile about the
> representation, or whether it just means they're hitting it extremely
> hard...

Kernel hackers are probably quite hard on their archives, since they
sometimes boot kernels that do bad things...

Personally, I would like to get the archive off of the machine with the
questionable kernel, and have it stored on another machine.

Also, I think arch archives are significantly more robust.  No files are
edited, only a small number are added.  Usually file corruption happens
with data that is written.  It is also easier to recover, especially if
the most recent change is corrupt, it isn't too difficult to just back
it out, in the archive, and try again.

Dave