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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com> wrote: > > Why should pxeboot have ZFS support? >=20 > 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 =E2=80=94 at least till the size limi= t 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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?16051.1645463921>