On Fri, 2002-02-01 at 00:59, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > In my experience, unstable is "unstable".
At times. > > and came up in a very strange state. No users could log in, only root, and > > things like ps, w, and top wouldn't work. I was called, got in via ssh, > > Why happens when you runs these commands? (What does "wouldn't > work" mean?) They hung. Nothing happened until I hit ^C > What do the logs say? Nothing. syslogd is one of the things that didn't start. > What do you mean that it is impossible to be the same? (Are you saying > that proc was also mounted at / ?) Hmm. I didn't say that right. Mount showed /proc mounted. 'df' *also* showed /proc mounted, with the same size/used/free as /. > > > /proc by hand, started up the utils that didn't start, checked things out > > the best I could, and rebooted again. Same thing. I've gone through > > What do the kernel messages say? Nothing. > What do the logs say? Nothing > What are these utils that didn't start? (Some network services that need > to be correctly setup in /etc/rc*.d/ ?) networking, syslog, just about anything that needs /proc to me mounted and readable. > Sometimes when I upgrade from stable to unstable, I have had some packages > not reinstalled and some software didn't start that should have. This machine was running unstable for quite some time, stabley. :) Tim
