Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:55:27 +0200 From: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@acm.org> Cc: Alexander Kabaev <kan@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: ZFS: i/o error - all block copies unavailable after upgrading to r225312 Message-ID: <4E6CCBDF.1090206@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20110911113109.GA81577@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <20110901223646.14b8aae8@o2.pl> <4E60DBBD.1040703@FreeBSD.org> <4E679D3D.1000007@FreeBSD.org> <4E6B1285.70508@FreeBSD.org> <4E6B1AD4.6080206@FreeBSD.org> <4E6B320A.4090606@FreeBSD.org> <20110910110310.GA6263@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <4E6C71FA.50906@FreeBSD.org> <20110911113109.GA81577@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 09/11/11 13:31, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2011-Sep-11 11:31:54 +0300, Andriy Gapon<avg@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> And I am actually wondering about -fno-unit-at-a-time option. >> In my opinion this is an anti-optimization option and it can actually increase >> a size of a final binary. In fact, it looks like the option was introduced to >> boot2 in r132870 in the year 2004, way before GCC 4.X switch, and it was >> introduced to avoid some optimizations that produced broken code. >> I wonder if there is any reason to keep using that option now. > > In any case, size isn't an issue for any of gptboot, gptzfsboot or > zfsboot (unlike boot2). For that matter, why do we need both > gptboot and gptzfsboot? It would be more convenient to have a > single GPT bootstrap that handled both UFS& ZFS. > It would be much more convenient, and also simplify adding installation onto ZFS partitions in the installer significantly. -Nathan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E6CCBDF.1090206>