From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 3 13:34:28 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 826CE8DA; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 13:34:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yerenkow@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D4098FC08; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 13:34:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f182.google.com with SMTP id wc20so5546653obb.13 for ; Sat, 03 Nov 2012 06:34:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VVIj2WEdQmgzg0bJKNJ7ZbhJe9u5UUKlrQa1MWAfo74=; b=LFfc4/nWH7VRa0Ge6L9Q/wu0b9v1S/iiXEs0XzZrcEnj2cTX3etgHgdk7gqnCR/0ZS HGAXIaVIA9go+lENEVQLFE+d8mZeCrWMLppcsIcKd9dhoVbdEQ9rEckXLvo1w8Wnzg1Q 3SOAN6qFRQwiHxG75J00sxvY+sHdufI5thi5BeMe1H5H22IDbZUyZwZw1WlalKhQvlAt VVddiFYLL/C+sXKYlF4le5kQuNajqigoaXN5xy5rmkNRcucrN76E/5YmPB/WANpuVrm/ R1dhPhibJf++lQ7y8WRMUv5ss0WTPbq9lmVR2zv3AVaAEs2+Cw+Dx8sfObX79lRwon6k Sx9g== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.32.241 with SMTP id m17mr3817166oei.50.1351949667224; Sat, 03 Nov 2012 06:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.58.165 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 06:34:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1167404891.20121103170049@serebryakov.spb.ru> References: <1167404891.20121103170049@serebryakov.spb.ru> Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 15:34:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD as read-only firmware From: Alexander Yerenkow To: lev@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: freebsd-current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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, 03 Nov 2012 13:34:28 -0000 2012/11/3 Lev Serebryakov > Hello, Alexander. > You wrote 3 =CE=CF=D1=C2=D2=D1 2012 =C7., 16:14:21: > > AY> Hello all! > AY> Some time ago I got somewhere idea, that base OS should be RO - > readonly. > AY> And should be updated easily (ACID) and with possibility of fast > rollback. > Why it is better than nanobsd? > Of course, that's all IMHO and fit for my usage: 1) Same FreeBSD, as in laptop/desktop, (e.g. really same - GENERIC kernel is used, without dropping any kerberos or else), and yes, I know that nanobsd can that; 2) .vmdk simply deployed into Esxi/virtualbox (not sure nanobsd can produce that) 3) Transparent /etc/ modifiying VS nanobsd approach (edit, don't forget mount /cfg, copy there;) 4) Only OS, no packages included - e.g. I can upgrade/downgrade packages without touching any byte of OS. Except for symlinks :) nanobsd specified that if you want packages - you need built them in. Of course differences not so big, and I'm not saying that my way is more better. It just raised question deep in me - why OS still aren't modularized, and most of it not in RO (while it should). Something like this > -- > // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov > > --=20 Regards, Alexander Yerenkow