From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Oct 27 07:03:31 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6752440366 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 07:03:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ralf-mardorf@riseup.net) Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CL2jZ6QP5z4QB5 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 07:03:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ralf-mardorf@riseup.net) Received: from bell.riseup.net (bell-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CL2jT4X37zFpCV for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 00:03:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1603782205; bh=rO7KbQjfM7BEBTtKYcsrpMYs3DfLtNpv0LtpVDB0q5s=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=d9ihoT2e0actdUoxpqEYTlT88kcFNTQgTmS3TXDNQR7gJaqeX5hchhBIdHP0y/2Bv GNneZHcwLltlEHVz4lwNGPzB3GsIlBSVmpSCCDLLRa2Amh9Q/xLLOnSJkvk/eWCzJp 35hppG665Dlp2wtIrmfLatIL3KKkzLZxucIgFIMY= X-Riseup-User-ID: D4A9DDAE802BCB9DC8BE334D98BF7A844629415EFBA91AEAC33319E377F7F1B4 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bell.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CL2jS6fZ0zJnc4 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 00:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:03:05 +0100 From: Ralf Mardorf To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What is the "better / best " method to multi-boot different OSes natively WITHOUT VirtualBox(es) ? Message-ID: <20201027080305.4853e10d@archlinux> In-Reply-To: <20201027062934.d0bd53b0192c33a18491b636@sohara.org> References: <20201024111010.5c867e8540a369b826d26703@sohara.org> <20201025065025.6a13dc89@archlinux> <20201025173321.8adee3e5.freebsd@edvax.de> <20201026153012.0cf46ec8@gumby.homeunix.com> <10e0134ddb726ac78174a63bd20ec0bdeb3c896d.camel@riseup.net> <20201026180155.48690495@archlinux> <20201026230836.5cd9e0dc@gumby.homeunix.com> <20201027071230.0c60b09b@archlinux> <20201027062934.d0bd53b0192c33a18491b636@sohara.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CL2jZ6QP5z4QB5 X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=d9ihoT2e; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ralf-mardorf@riseup.net designates 198.252.153.129 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ralf-mardorf@riseup.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.46 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[198.252.153.129:from]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[riseup.net:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[riseup.net,none]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.90)[-0.897]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16652, ipnet:198.252.153.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[198.252.153.129:from]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.97)[-0.967]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[riseup.net:s=squak]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.992]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[riseup.net:dkim]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-questions] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 07:03:31 -0000 On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 06:29:34 +0000, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: >If the OS is really often used then it would probably make more >sense, and be far more convenient, to have it available in a VM than to >multi-boot. If possible, yes! Proprietary drivers and other issues could be show stoppers.