Re: KDE is now broken (Fwd: Heads-up: KDE4 hitting testing tonight (UTC) )
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:18:54AM -0500, lee wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:46:47AM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > In <[🔎] 20090526142918.GC5158@cat.rubenette.is-a-geek.com>, lee wrote:
> > >On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 01:17:16PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > >> Use the old software. It might not run on the latest release of Debian,
> > >> but it should run on whatever version you had before. Older releases
> > >> are maintained in the archive, and you can archive whatever you need
> > >> yourself if you don't want to depend on the Debian infrastructure.
> > >How do you get it to run on
> > >contemporary hardware?
> >
> > Run it on the hardware you were running it on before. We are talking about
> > accessing the data for the purpose of migration; you should still have the
> > hardware (and software) you are migrating from.
>
> 1.) When I'm changing hardware, I'm usually replacing board, CPU and
> RAM. I take that out of the case and put the new stuff in. That means
> I can't run the software on the old hardware anymore, not without
> changing the stuff out again. It would really suck if I had to do
> that.
If your backup/archive hardware won't connect to the new computer, then
you'll need to migrate the data to new archive hardware first, then
migrate the computer to new hardware.
> 2.) I'm not so much talking about migration as about keeping data
> readable. Keep it on your disks or put it aside on some removable
> storage medium, then after 15 or 30 years, try to read it. Having used
> a mysql database to store the data doesn't make it easier to read it
> after 15 or 30 years.
As far as I know, the only digital media that is designed to last that
long on the shelf without data loss is tape. Since tape technology
moves apace, you should probably archive a couple of tape drives along
with the data.
> > Find your local LUG and ask around. I can virtually guarantee that there
> > someone with a storage unit full of old hardware they are keeping for some
> > reason. Even better if you have a local FreeGeek.
>
> Who would keep all the old hardware? And for what? And it's nothing
> you could rely on.
Actually, I need old hardware. Newer hardware gives my wife headaches.
It varies, though. Usually, she can tolerate my NetServer LPr dual
P-II-450, but right now its a problem. I'll get my 486 out of storage
and put NetBSD on it and see how it is for her. Of course, its
ISA and won't boot if there's a drive bigger than 1.2 GB on either IDE
controller. What I really need is an old 100 MHz or slower SMP server
with scsi. Or, at least, an ISA scsi card.
> How do you maintain 15 or 30 year old hardware?
Carefully. Memory is still available for my 486. The biggest problem
for me is hard drives; they die and aren't made small anymore. Scsi
fixes that (since there are no bios issues with scsi).
> > >And who guarantees that 30 year old hardware you kept in
> > >storage will still work when you need it?
> >
> > You do.
>
> No, I don't. I have no way to do that. I didn't manufacture it. I can
> only assume that it might work or not after 30 years.
>
> If what you're saying is practical for you, go ahead and keep your
> pile of hardware over 30 years or longer and try to put something
> together to read your data when you need to. That isn't practical for
> me.
Choose hardware in the first place that allows upgrade. E.g. scsi
drives instead of IDE.
Also, do you really need the data to sit on a shelf for 30 years, or can
it be cycled to new media every 5 years?
There's something to be said for tarring to a raw disk partition (so
there's no filesystem to be corrupted), and putting the same data to
three different drives. Then using some data comparision utility
(there's a deb available, I forget the name) to choose the correct block
for every block of the data. This is far more reliable given three
partially corrupted data sets than e.g. raid where if a certain number
of blocks fail, the whole disk is marked bad.
Doug.
Reply to: