Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 21:39:14 +0000 From: "Teske, Devin" <Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com> To: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> Cc: Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org>, Current Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "Teske, Devin" <Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com> Subject: Re: Default MBR boot "manager" Message-ID: <236424BC-EC62-4FDC-B9F6-E08653FF2F4B@fisglobal.com> In-Reply-To: <52814CD8.5020708@freebsd.org> References: <33391A36-2E7A-473B-87E0-88BDE1AC97D1@fisglobal.com> <52814CD8.5020708@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 11, 2013, at 1:32 PM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> On 11/11/13 15:19, Teske, Devin wrote:
>> Topic: Lenovo Laptops and bsdinstall zfsboot with MBR layout...
>>=20
>> Should we do the quick patch to change the default
>> from /boot/boot0 to /boot/mbr:
>>=20
>> Index: zfsboot
>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> --- zfsboot (revision 258016)
>> +++ zfsboot (working copy)
>> @@ -764,7 +764,7 @@ zfs_create_diskpart()
>> #
>> f_eval_catch $funcname gpart "$GPART_CREATE" mbr \$disk =
||
>> return $FAILURE
>> - f_eval_catch $funcname gpart "$GPART_BOOTCODE" /boot/boo=
t0 \
>> + f_eval_catch $funcname gpart "$GPART_BOOTCODE" /boot/mbr=
\
>> \$disk || return $FAILURE
>>=20
>> #
>>=20
>> That would fix things for Lenovo laptops for the next
>> release until I finish up the bootcode selection menu.
>> I'd like to take my time in making sure Allan and I design
>> a worthy bootcode selection menu.
>=20
> This patch looks good (I don't remember why it was boot0 in the first pla=
ce). I think gpart automatically installs something like /boot/mbr by defau=
lt, so I'd be interested to know if making the diff purely negative still w=
orks.
>=20
> On another note, I think we should move away from a selector. Right now, =
we have three kinds of boot code:
> 1. ZFS boot code
> 2. UFS boot code
> 3. boot0
>=20
> Unifying 1 and 2 would help a lot -- I don't know of any reason we need b=
oth except for tradition. #3 is probably best done as a post-install config=
step ("Install FreeBSD boot manager" or something), which also means it wo=
rks for UFS systems.
Well, I'm sensitive to the fact that sysinstall offered "none" and
even explained why in an F1 dialog that brought up "drives.hlp"
to explain that you might want to keep whatever (alternate) boot
manager you may be using already.
In a proposed selector, the full breadth of options that I was
envisioning was:
GPT + gptboot
GPT + none (use your existing boot manager... syslinux?)
MBR + mbr
MBR + boot0
MBR + none (again, BYOBM)
Hadn't got around to zfsboot yet. Where would that go? at the top?
GPT + zfsboot ?
(and of course, this is x86 specific... I was gleaning from sysinstall
that for systems like pc98, they call it an IPL and there's only two
options... a standard IPL or bring your own boot manager, aka "none").
I imagine that there would be architectures that are like the ol' pc98,
wherein they don't have all these options (is, for example? sparc64
GPT only?)
--=20
Devin
_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidentia=
l. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message an=
d all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any ma=
nner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware=
that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and revie=
w by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?236424BC-EC62-4FDC-B9F6-E08653FF2F4B>