Live data from Hacker News

The classic Unix horror story

lug.wsu.edu

11–20 of 54 posts

Re: The classic Unix horror story

#11

frequent automated offsite backups are your friend

Yes, but too bad that frequent offsite automated backups were still at least a decade off in 1986. At the very least, the network bandwidth just simply wasn't there. Heck, at this stage of the game, 1Mbps was considered to be blazing fast on a LAN. Even Internet backbones were 56k.

Re: The classic Unix horror story

#12
One time I did something like

$ chown -R terra_t.terra_t /

on a production system. Fortunately I was able to recover the permissions of most of the system files from the rpm database, and do the rest by hand...

Re: The classic Unix horror story

#15

frequent automated offsite backups are your friend

Yes, but too bad that frequent offsite automated backups were still at least a decade off in 1986. At the very least, the network bandwidth just simply wasn't there. Heck, at this stage of the game, 1Mbps was considered to be blazing fast on a LAN. Even Internet backbones were 56k.

i know for a fact that backups were possible in 86 and that's all that would be needed to turn an accidental deletion into a non-disaster

but you're right, networking speed/bandwidth has gotten better since then, but that's irrelevant and I never claimed it hadn't. my point was that there is a simple, well-known solution/palliative for this, so no need for this kind of drama going forward.

Re: The classic Unix horror story

#16
post #9

I've never actually been bitten by rm (or done anything remotely this badass) but in college I did have a bad Unix moment: Late at night, I was tarring up a finished project right before emailing it to my professor. I ran: tar -cvf *.cpp *.h something.tar instead of: tar -cvf something.tar *.cpp *.h It happily wrote most of my project into a tar file on top of the first source file, then complained that something.tar…

I think personal experiences with shell command typo disasters and hard drive failures are probably the most common, and most effective reasons why people start using version control and backups religiously. The Unix command-line in particular is dangerous: incredibly powerful when used right, but one slight mistake and you cut off a finger.

Fortunately, they are only virtual fingers and we can grow them back on demand with adequate preparation, unlike real ones. :)

Re: The classic Unix horror story

#18

My terrible UNIX, or really SunOS/Solaris moments have been: o typing 'halt' into the wrong xterm, shutting down well planners o and likely on the same network, jacking up the NIS+ on Solaris It's been a constant itch that I never did manage to understand what I was doing wrong, such that NIS+ wouldn't restart correctly.

My marquee move is to shut down the ethernet interface of a box I'm SSHed into.

Re: The classic Unix horror story

#19
post #4

Is there a "social news sites classics" directory yet? I would love to see reposts of oldies no longer justified due to a good directory of these things, prominently linked. Pretty please do not create such a directory in this comments thread.

http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/ The Hacker Jargon page would probably be the best index of the so called "classics", although it hasn't been updated in years.

Re: The classic Unix horror story

#20
post #9

I've never actually been bitten by rm (or done anything remotely this badass) but in college I did have a bad Unix moment: Late at night, I was tarring up a finished project right before emailing it to my professor. I ran: tar -cvf *.cpp *.h something.tar instead of: tar -cvf something.tar *.cpp *.h It happily wrote most of my project into a tar file on top of the first source file, then complained that something.tar…

Writing this comment, I had to look up the order of the parameters to tar; I still can't remember. Stupid tar.

The -f (--file) flag takes an argument. So you could do:

    tar -cf *.cpp -f something.tar

It is easier to remember order if you know what the flags mean.
Post reply on HN