Uraniun235 wrote:Xeriar noted that one use was for a "guaranteed clean start" because he had a client who was "so virus prone" that it was "the only reliable solution". If the USB drive is writeable, then that USB-bootable OS is just as prone to viruses as any other OS.
I had her booting from CD, mind. Only real advantage of a write-lockable USB stick is that it fits on a keychain.
The idea of 'taking your OS and settings with you' is probably a much more compelling reason for most of us in that use, though.
Xon wrote:
Great, maybe you can get around to actually
reading what I quoted in the first point(
here). Which ironically has nothing todo with the problems of USB-boot, but of how the OS reacts to an device with the same unique ID being plugged in which is already in use. And then extended that to what happens when that device is the system device!
...and you ignored my post entirely. Cute. I certainly read what you wrote. It boils down to this:
Xon Needing an Ego Boost wrote:
I, Xon, do not know what the fuck I am talking about, but I will try my damndest to win this one stupid point so I can pretend that I do on the Internet. Maybe I'll get some respect I don't deserve that way!
You're certainly right about it having nothing to do with USB boot problems. It's almost, you know, like it reports a booted USB device as a different sort of device entirely and not tying the hardware location to the serial number because as my previous post specified
that is exactly what it does.
Xon wrote:
I'll leave why supporting installing to a device which can go away on the OS if someone plugs another copy in at any time, is a bad idea to the readers.
And if you'd have bothered to read and understand
your own link, alongside mine (which you conveniently ignored), you would understand
why that does not happen. Two USB devices with the same serial number end up with the same device path. Boot from USB gives the booting device its own device path (actually appearing as a /dev/sdx device), which the second usb stick is not going to get.
But you conveniently ignored that part of my post. I wonder why.
I'll leave the causes for your intellectual cowardice 'to the readers'.
At the very least, you should be able to present
one report of what you claim will happen actually happening. My bet is you'll ignore that sentence too, go away (wouldn't that be nice), or twist it to be something of no relevance to your actual claim: Someone uses a pair of USB sticks with the same serial number, boots off one, plugging in the other causes issues with the booting OS being able to read its own system files.
Give fire to a man, and he will be warm for a day.
Set him on fire, and he will be warm for life.
