From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 3 21:08:35 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 2B6B4A4A; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 21:08:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@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 CB0308FC12; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 21:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f182.google.com with SMTP id wc20so5788923obb.13 for ; Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:08:34 -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=tvKD9Rr4MDKK/bVCo7/FXUv+ACzOo/LRpUwGVMWgvkI=; b=gBuKJ3U02LxsZsi3xzRz8bGNbNHV5AQ/B+9SFaQgmH7UsJOvui5LWb1WQZYHbjdUuX PjvsHABhxPh1jE9MvKzvLE6NCy3eO+zeQLlELPhL1IGQIpoYyObNnP03ATBmYScFAX2i gzhC6MSmSWjUVgHjso3iWAFpkTpluOnItuVO3AHHdSUdgpCdgRwXTJ4ltdIw5KBPUkH2 EJEVHSPR+DAVdUed/CVnkxWVtevV4nCCNJzqpnsSzqn+WEZJI42UrawfCkLd/KUlvM9v fQNY3z2S28wbdu8Y7YzNJ2EABt4C9/YaGjMXMYchAg2Lol2YdZma46zmcugBOXquEBlV y4zw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.172.74 with SMTP id ba10mr4420737obc.83.1351976914205; Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.143.33 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 14:08:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1167404891.20121103170049@serebryakov.spb.ru> Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 14:08:34 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD as read-only firmware From: Garrett Cooper To: Alexander Yerenkow Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: lev@freebsd.org, 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 21:08:35 -0000 On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 6:34 AM, Alexander Yerenkow wrote: ... Of course, that's all IMHO and fit for my usage: > ... > 2) .vmdk simply deployed into Esxi/virtualbox (not sure nanobsd can produce > that) > There's no reason why nanobsd couldn't (or shouldn't) do that. It's something that I thought about when the "Google Code In" announcement was sent out; honestly it's no more complicated than installing a port and running a few commands on the full disk image produced with nanobsd. > 3) Transparent /etc/ modifiying VS nanobsd approach (edit, don't forget > mount /cfg, copy there;) > I agree that /cfg doesn't make things transparent for end-users, but that's a feature (that could potentially be polished up with a one-liner command/alias). rc.initdiskless is the one that does the shuffling/stomping of files BTW. > 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. > You can do that with nanobsd too. People that use FreeNAS 8 frequently tried to do this :). > 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 > Thanks! -Garrett