Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 14:30:11 -0600 From: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> To: Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org>, Michael Dexter <editor@callfortesting.org> Cc: Current Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "Teske, Devin" <Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com>, Peter Grehan <grehan@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] bsdinstall and zfsboot enhancements Message-ID: <52813E53.20403@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <F3512B82-7B2E-40D9-A513-C4C2430F9255@fisglobal.com> References: <C9783B1F-20EA-4C08-9947-70DF363E8B6A@fisglobal.com> <5275C597.6070702@freebsd.org> <97944047-D575-4E2E-B687-9871DFE058E3@fisglobal.com> <ABD90FE2-1540-410A-959E-D91D0BE811E3@freebsd.org> <52769CFE.5080707@freebsd.org> <5281340E.8080009@callfortesting.org> <F3512B82-7B2E-40D9-A513-C4C2430F9255@fisglobal.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/11/13 14:18, Teske, Devin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > > On Nov 11, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Michael Dexter wrote: > > > Hello all, > > I have been experimenting with various BSD and GNU/Linux boot media > under bhyve and noticed that we may want to accommodate the "LiveCD" > mode of the installer, which in turn requires the correct console. > > Currently, one is prompted for VT100 for installation but this does not > appear to work/stick for LiveCD mode. > > Can anyone verify this? > > > While I developed this patch... > http://druidbsd.cvs.sf.net/viewvc/druidbsd/bsdinstall_zfs/usr.sbin%3A%3Absdinstall%3A%3Ascripts%3A%3Aconfig.patch?revision=1.10&view=markup > > Reasons exist to search for a better solution, see here: > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2013-November/046148.html > (and messages that follow it) > > Is modifying init(8) still the way to go? What modification do we want to make? > I'll do the work if we can come to consensus. > > Or should we touch up the patch in some way to address the original concerns? > I think modifying init is the way to go -- it keeps the install system from interfering with the installed one, as well as fixing this kind of issue with moved hard drives or PXE booting or what have you. If we can provide a guarantee that any system that displays text has a working console (unless explicitly configured not to), useability is improved. I would propose one of the following (and volunteer to write the code): Option A ------------ 1. init checks if there is an entry in /etc/ttys for the terminal[s] corresponding to the value[s] in kern.console 2. If an entry for each console terminal exists in /etc/ttys, enable it 3. If not, invent one with a terminal type of "ansi" The one issue here is that someone may want to force a particular entry to off and still have it be the kernel console. This is tricky. We could invent a new "status" field that is not "on" or "off" ("auto", maybe, or "ifconsole"?). Which brings us to: Option B ----------- Very similar to Option A, except only provide an automatic console using (2) and (3) if the "console" terminal is marked "on". This would increase the magic attached to "console" in /etc/ttys, but fix the problem with (A). It's possible another approach would work as well. Does anyone have thoughts on this? -Nathan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52813E53.20403>