Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 08:52:33 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is there a way to prompt for boot device? Message-ID: <19970921085233.JH45420@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199709202124.XAA18194@bitbox.follo.net>; from Eivind Eklund on Sep 20, 1997 23:24:25 %2B0200 References: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970919174919.20260V-100000@mail.cdsnet.net> <199709200219.WAA13122@smoke.marlboro.vt.us> <19970920130551.DB36336@uriah.heep.sax.de> <199709202124.XAA18194@bitbox.follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Eivind Eklund wrote: > > What the heck would break if we started shipping GENERIC in 3.0 with > > `swap generic'? What might break if we allowed -a for other kernels > > as well? I assume the answer to both questions is just ``nothing''. > > It is a minor security breach - it would e.g. allow somebody with > physical access to boot from a floppy[1] even if the machine isn't > set up to do so from the BIOS. As Nate also pointed out, you can do this already right now. Say ``fd(0,a)kernel'' at the boot prompt, and away you go. Also, i assume your answer was for question #2? So this still leaves question #1: what would break if we shipped `swap generic' kernels as GENERIC? The root file system is being adjusted automatically anyway, swap and dump spaces are configured at /etc/rc time. Except of allowing -a, there's IMHO not much more difference to a `swap generic' kernel then. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970921085233.JH45420>