Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2017 06:52:20 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 218822] The installed system mounts itself at "da2". Message-ID: <bug-218822-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D218822 Bug ID: 218822 Summary: The installed system mounts itself at "da2". Product: Base System Version: 11.0-RELEASE Hardware: i386 OS: Any Status: New Severity: Affects Only Me Priority: --- Component: misc Assignee: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Reporter: m_h_asfour@yahoo.com English is not my language, so feel free to rewrite this to make it better. I installed your FREEBSD from one USB stick to another and I faced a problem that can be easily avoided. Your installer is written assuming that it will boot from the installation media (the USB stick that contains the .img file) and it mounts it as "da1". The only choice I had was to insert the other USB stick at a later point in time so that the machine will not try to boot from it. I inserted it after = the first one was mounted, so this second one was mounted as "da2" . The installation process was successful but when I tried to boot the installed system, it tried to mount itself as "da2" and consequently failed. I know t= hat this can be manually adjusted most probably in one form or another of a mou= nt table, but I believe that directing the users to insert only the installati= on media during boot time and changing your installer script to direct them to insert the target media at the appropriate point during the installation process is the least-effort clean solution. Can you please write an installer that runs under windows, for example, that will install the ".img" file from the hard disk directly to the target USB instead of the extra step of making the installation media ?. This step is redundant for the vast majority of users and it is much easier to authentic= ate the installed system during and after the installation process. The license is the very first reason why anyone would install your one more "*nix" products. Why isn't the license the very first criteria for applicat= ion classification ?!. Why isn't there at least even just a minimal working "pu= re" installation that is not contaminated with GNU, GPL ... etc ?!. If not for = the usual reasons, then at least to justify your existence and provide an evide= nce that someone can really live with your license. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-218822-8>