From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 28 04:28:16 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F51106566C; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 04:28:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: from mail-we0-f182.google.com (mail-we0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E818FC0A; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 04:28:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werg1 with SMTP id g1so1498791wer.13 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:28:08 -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=nZkVvSNOCPSopeZn75d6Zb67MbFJL06UZolsShBu+Hs=; b=jWNJD7+ieMRhdS+0RyqS7b5B0V8JXth8Dnx7p1gmKzhiPY4YK5fI5Y6YU1sZYjasTT rgon7sQjX1efuifyAo7SO+ez5IJl8XJV7vQOB8rSLGz0+4aB4MtBcB4t8Jc/+fCBCzCz ZecuUikXddzksetCik42V/L3KQ9u4Y4kqXW1sC62adhvDaHIz8lcyc++rjA+OW9ddK5w GPe9OIdqvYzTbU18LH6jBdy8vRfYjt+c5DFz9vcqSJ2JbpgOjBhlDrJTISK5aVBI94rY 0RBpWEsK08aQ6ZhTW8nB3r9XdMu9WcC1drVCARFzeoZXBfdeYMBpJWuHruGYvfLDpzmW xL2g== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.215.194 with SMTP id e44mr275286wep.61.1340857688567; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:28:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.155.4 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:28:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <60047.1340833140@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <658E457B-3107-4BE8-A8EE-4F97D021843E@xcllnt.net> <60047.1340833140@critter.freebsd.dk> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:28:08 -0700 Message-ID: From: Kevin Oberman To: Poul-Henning Kamp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:45:25 +0000 Cc: Doug Rabson , Marcel Moolenaar , Pawel Jakub Dawidek , freebsd-hackers , Andriy Gapon , Marcel Moolenaar , freebsd-current , "Andrey V. Elsukov" Subject: Re: [CFC/CFT] large changes in the loader(8) code X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 04:28:17 -0000 On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > I would like to point out that all other operating system which has > had this precise problem, have solved it by adding a bootfs partition > to hold the kernel+modules required to truly understand the disk-layout ? I have seen some form of this solution suggested three times (once by me) and now by someone who I think I can safely states is pretty familiar with geom. So far I have seen no direct response and only a passing comment by jhb that it might be difficult. Sometimes standards need to be broken. Sometimes they such so badly that te entire industry ignores them. But, unless there i a good reason to ignore them, one should fully justify doing so, all the more so when there are obvious ways that non-compliance can lead to disaster. (Think of geli disk there some other software steps on the last block.) Moreover, I think I can see a legitimate case, though I have not tried it. Say I have a FreeBSD system with a large, unused space on the disk and it uses gmirror. I decide that I need to have the ability to occasionally boot Linux on this system (or, even Windows 8). For some reason, and I can think of several, I can't use a virtual system. I create a new partition for the second OS and install it. It knows nothing about the gmirror, so it just uses the disk it is installed on and never touches the metadata. Is this possible? Looks reasonable to me. I really, really feel uncomfortable about all of this. And when people start claiming that, by a very strained interpretation of what appears on the surface to be a clear specification, they are not violating the standard. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer E-mail: kob6558@gmail.com