From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 30 02:26:51 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5605916A4CE for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 02:26:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fw.farid-hajji.net (fw.farid-hajji.net [213.146.115.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB13C43D3F for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 02:26:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cpghost@cordula.ws) Received: from epia2.farid-hajji.net (epia-2 [192.168.254.11]) by fw.farid-hajji.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FEAB4BCF0; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 04:24:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 04:28:33 +0200 From: cpghost@cordula.ws To: /dev/null Message-ID: <20050430022833.GA54886@epia2.farid-hajji.net> References: <6.1.0.6.2.20050426233321.084e9210@cobalt.antimatter.net> <51899.216.177.243.42.1114584317.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> <6.1.0.6.2.20050427001118.0327cd50@cobalt.antimatter.net> <52515.216.177.243.42.1114586501.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> <61359.216.177.243.35.1114722481.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> <20050429105416.GA94049@wedge.madpilot.net> <42729FBF.8010800@cordula.ws> <1359.216.177.243.38.1114821110.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1359.216.177.243.38.1114821110.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: boot banner project X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 02:26:51 -0000 On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 05:31:49PM -0700, /dev/null wrote: > > The same holds true for boot banners: not every hardware out there > > has hires graphics capabilities. > FWIW, the project *intends* to make itself an *option*, not something that > that needs to be disabled - which I think would be irresponsible in this > case. Please don't top post. Yes, there's nothing wrong with that. As long as the default still installs over PXE, serial etc... (think rack mounted U1/U2 headless servers as yet another typical platform that a lot of us manage by the hundreds). However, there's no reason why this should be part of the official source tree. Use a port for optional kernel or bootloader stuff. IMHO, the easiest way to achieve this, would be to write a port that creates a custom ISO, with that (hypothetical) bells and whistles GUI installer/boot prompt and a custom kernel with your extension. Something like sysutils/freesbie port... sysutils/eyecandy perhaps? ;) Happy hacking. Cheers, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/