Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:28:10 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG (Maxim Sobolev) Cc: keichii@peorth.iteration.net (Michael C . Wu), mwm@mired.org (Mike Meyer), current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /boot partition? Message-ID: <200010170128.SAA05793@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <39E735BD.8BDA697C@FreeBSD.org> from "Maxim Sobolev" at Oct 13, 2000 07:18:05 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 07:22:20AM -0500, Mike Meyer scribbled: > > | Just curious - now that the kernel has moved into /boot/kernel/kernel, > > | does anyone know how well would it work to put /boot in it's own > > | partition (possibly in it's own slice)? > > > > I do not think loader can see stuff in other partitions. > > Nope, the loader can load stuff from other partitions, even from some strange > ones like msdos ;), so theoretically it should be possible to have /boot, or > even /boot/kernel, on another partition (it may require to tweak loader config > files, though), but I really do not see any reasons behind such weird setup. I could have a 40G /, and not worry about the cylinder spanning problem, if my /boot were in a seperate (low) partition. I could have a / that was of an FS type not understood by the kernel, until after a module defining the FS type had been loaded. I could have a / that was on a controller for which I did not have a device comiled into my kernel, and only loaded it as a module from an FS type that it _did_ understand. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200010170128.SAA05793>