269 reputation
413
bio website
location United States
age 29
visits member for 2 years, 5 months
seen Dec 20 at 9:22

I actively encourage the editing of any of my Question, Answer, and Tag Wiki content on all StackExchange sites except for meta sites. In other words, if you spot an inaccuracy or wish to clarify or improve a post of mine, add sources, etc., PLEASE do so! It will greatly benefit the net welfare and knowledge capital of the community. I am writing this here just in case you are of the misconception that answers are like forum posts, indelible articles authored by a single person.

The edit function is there for a reason, folks. I promise to never lash out at someone for substantially editing content originally authored by me, as long as your edit is constructive. If you don't yet have the site privilege to make instantaneous edits and I see your edit in the suggestion queue, I will do my best to either accept your edit outright, or incorporate the most useful parts of your edit into my post by "editing your edit".

If you have been told before that you shouldn't substantially edit others' answers, or if you've been the victim of polemic as a result of doing so, I'd like to apologize for that behavior. I think it's very counterproductive; our community is much worse-off for that kind of attitude.

Future visitors are best served by being able to read one cohesive, well-edited answer with sources to get the sum-total of the community's best knowledge in a single answer. A string of answers or comments each with their own nuggets of truth is much harder to decipher than one cohesive text. With the edit function, thanks to the fact that we each bring our own perspectives and unique knowledge, it is possible for us to author one cohesive text that eliminates the natural tendency of comment strings, replacing it with high-quality works that rival those of Wikipedia.

BTW, I don't approve of most edits on meta sites because I very rarely find questions on meta sites which deal purely in factual matters, so my answers are generally just my personal feelings on the matter.


Feb
22
comment Migrate raw disk image over LAN
It's gonna take a while. Realized I have a gigabit port with a 100 Mbit/s allocation. Crap.
Feb
21
comment Migrate raw disk image over LAN
That would also eliminate the spurious/scary "No space left on device", since it's going to resize /dev/sda3 down to about 1.3 TB and will be copying it into a partition on the destination that's expecting to hold about 2.9 TB.
Feb
21
comment Migrate raw disk image over LAN
Awesome! I'm OK with copying the partition's free space because these instructions meet all of my other criteria. Although, wouldn't just resizing the filesystem and the partition itself on oldserver eliminate the need to copy all the free space? I don't care about /boot because it's so small, but for / at least, I could do that, right? Just set the partition's end sector to equal what sector resize2fs sets the end of the FS sector to. Well, sector, block... probably block. But thanks for this! This is great!
Feb
21
accepted Migrate raw disk image over LAN
Feb
21
comment Migrate raw disk image over LAN
mdadm? I'm using hardware RAID. And I have no idea what AOE is, and have never used iSCSI. I don't think my servers are in the same broadcast domain, just in the same datacenter. There's at least one or two switches between the servers.
Feb
21
comment Migrate raw disk image over LAN
I think partimage can do raw copies that are filesystem aware, but it doesn't support ext4. So there goes that as an option... rsync is looking nicer as an option, as long as it preserves all discretionary access controls (a la chmod) and can cleanly copy over symlinks and device files...
Feb
21
awarded  Editor
Feb
21
revised Migrate raw disk image over LAN
added 480 characters in body
Feb
21
awarded  Student
Feb
21
asked Migrate raw disk image over LAN
Jan
3
comment How to avoid automatic responses from putting our mail server in a loop?
Which mail server are you using? Any solution would be implementation-specific to the functionality of the mail server and the operating system.
Dec
20
answered Warn users that the server is under maintenance
Dec
17
awarded  Talkative
Aug
22
awarded  Scholar
Aug
22
accepted Why Don't Security ACLs Refresh Automatically?
Aug
22
comment Why Don't Security ACLs Refresh Automatically?
BTW, we already performed a CHKDSK. No errors reported. ICACLS showed permissions the same as Windows Explorer, which is to say, everything is working. The problem is that we don't know how the original problem occurred and don't know if it'll come back. It caused a lot of headache because we were sitting there looking at the permissions for a user set to Full Control but they were still getting access denied. Then we logged off on the server, logged back on, and he wasn't in the ACL list at all!
Aug
22
comment Why Don't Security ACLs Refresh Automatically?
Thanks for your response! Unfortunately we can't reproduce the behavior now, and I don't think we're confusing NTFS filesystem ACLs with share drive permissions. We check both Properties and the "Sharing and Security" tab of every folder and they're always in sync. icacls shows nothing revealing and the permissions are now updating appropriately when we add or remove someone from the ACL list. BTW, we do use local groups, but we have to use individual domain users due to extremely custom permissions in some situations.
Aug
21
awarded  Autobiographer
Aug
21
comment Why Don't Security ACLs Refresh Automatically?
Procuring paid software in my environment is 100,000 times more painful than logging off / logging in every single time I want to make a change to my system. Installing free (as in beer) software is ALMOST as bad. Unfortunately I won't be able to use your tool. I know it's not the normal behavior, so I'm trying to troubleshoot it.
Aug
21
asked Why Don't Security ACLs Refresh Automatically?