Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:18:41 -0800
From:      "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net>
To:        Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com>
Cc:        Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, <sjg@juniper.net>
Subject:   Re: pxeboot binary is too big on FreeBSD (>640KBytes)
Message-ID:  <16051.1645463921@kaos.jnpr.net>
In-Reply-To: <02586EFB-0BB5-46BF-9EE5-28623D20EFD3@me.com>
References:  <6984fd5d-ae58-11a4-0d21-a8695b0c77f7@selasky.org> <02586EFB-0BB5-46BF-9EE5-28623D20EFD3@me.com>

index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail

Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com> wrote:
> > Why should pxeboot have ZFS support?
> 
> Well, the feature X can be helpful for recovery purposes. The root
> cause is not the feature X itself, but the size limit. And the
> unfortunate fact, the size limit is not fixed, but depends on the
> system. Therefore there are two options - either to fix the size limit
> or drop option X from default build — at least till the size limit is
> fixed (or support for BIOS will be dropped).

Or just build separate variants.
As Bjoern said Lua is probably the straw breaking the cammel's back
but I think it reasonable to assume that a system that has the resources
to support ZFS does not have an ancient BIOS ?

Thus a non-ZFS version could work for older systems
while those without limitation can use the kitchen-sink version.


help

Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?16051.1645463921>