Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 11:36:36 -0500 From: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org> To: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: LUA loader: bhyve now doesn't? Message-ID: <CACNAnaEFnZax0UN135qa7rEcKMFcQPSUOiPqzg1--VdGQ999Kg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20180819163519.ss2nyhpxl7abpzzn@ler-imac.local> References: <20180819152253.bbcrefdvynl7y5ka@ler-imac.local> <CANCZdfqHV7Fy%2BbJAuMv5gfJmPJqh1QmKqjGz-bVH2wh6NyqeVQ@mail.gmail.com> <20180819153526.7ruovrpmdsimkmfj@ler-imac.local> <CANCZdfr2h=e-4%2BD9JYR3TkKyaEywYkCnXmyGmVMq6-NpN=GX2w@mail.gmail.com> <CACNAnaGh%2BgpwcDE3TQKd9xCnJpD4GtE2Z0wwjagKMUNVhdHznw@mail.gmail.com> <20180819163519.ss2nyhpxl7abpzzn@ler-imac.local>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 11:35 AM, Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 11:28:10AM -0500, Kyle Evans wrote: >> > filesystem? >> > >> >> (CC'ing jhb@ and tychon@, who might have better insight) >> >> If we can swing it, I think the best model here should have always >> been that userboot uses the host's scripts but the guest's >> loader.conf. The current model doesn't tolerate any mismatch between >> host and guest and looks unsustainable. > > Yeah, I have a FreeBSD-10, and a HardendBSD-12 VM, and BOTH failed until > I loaded the old /boot/userboot.so to my host. > > We really need to tolerate this condition, and NOT surprise the user. Right. That's what we're trying to figure out here, the best route forward to make this stuff reliably work.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACNAnaEFnZax0UN135qa7rEcKMFcQPSUOiPqzg1--VdGQ999Kg>