🚀 go-pugleaf

Olivier M. <XD*NUP@technologist.com> wrote:
> you mean both fs ? or is it ok if only the destination fs is

Both (source AND destination) MUST be unmounted.  Having the
destination fs mounted may cause system panic. Having the source
mounted will at require an e2fsck on the destination before
use, since the fs will not be marked as clean. Theoretically,
the data on it should be there, since dd also uses the buffer
cache (there is no real raw devices on Linux --- well, without
Direct IO).

> get mail (qmail: mailboxes _are_ in /home/username/Maildir), 
> and cgi that need to write to the disk wouldn't work anymore
> during this (too long) time.

that's why tar is best.

> I can do, is to tell by phone to somebody in the server room : take
> the rescue disk (LILO, set up to boot on the _second_ HD) and restart
> the PC.

Do it with tar, then.

> >By the way, how do you intend to automate the recovery process ?
> with a LILO disk as said a few lines before.

so it's not really automatic, which is probably enough for now.

> it will be too difficult. If you already tried something like
> this, feel free to make comments...

if you put multiple addresses on a A record, I don't think people
try them only if it fails: I think they are served in round-robin
fashion (but only a DNS specialist can answer this).