From nobody Sat Apr 13 08:30:51 2024 X-Original-To: bugs@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VGmq03LXDz5H1Y7 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:30:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VGmq02KhJz4Vdx for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:30:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1712997052; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=ZEM9KCPO8lGM5U20eQFYvHpRB7WhJyyM6xELY54ZV3MqXGc/L5mipDBnZLiklB/CbuwMW2 iiYBXWXpWF/l6K9h8uEimNxgFYv3spuSfD8orOlOH6PGd/zfmAeIkSK3oKMgom1PjxiWaU 0+WvS4nDwCzyZhmIM8+BkwyYG5e9eRoVyc5a+w27T9UG5mCsnlkrwHzRGsSS4DSx5RDr11 /yyp+g4dQrhHukFKuj0tmr/mfrI3t8oGNQMIkzxL3UbU5PzLb6JammTjEP0sUVtVjUgpuH ze9iP/wzcQ/t2toB5oIi1zD7T2Q1+tcmyLqQh9BZ0qNs6N2ACEUljmLvgZtBwQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1712997052; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=l+VZyzFUFFJojU+lrydG3NYM9yHB9d7AniPZePohbSU=; b=c4DvcA5k3jPD5duf5L8CDLEBh1XEK14VNPn2IVehiiRGUTFVBQ48HsvxtTcNKLfOhbEzK1 jNwocRXm/sXrePK/d9oAYlBMx7qxng9PT1vUGP4H17HGZgf4v0HmgB9N7fldekyCeptbLp 1xGUzezkB0lardP7IuQF2RZpsjPbvP4GzPz2At9T367eOVYJQ3odWnqF23NexNmjs07JYV gM/KFWbZFMEPBPxUMhbUqjxi9JW3MBcbT6vQSVqT4txbf0tNc8fXO/3LUiq8RjJnw3eEHs OL+fG18V5/+PeVrEthPOczSvTTwxElbE3Gvx47Rdfgrkb70osgO88aEmOxpneQ== Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VGmq01xPGzQYX for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:30:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 43D8UqMK069911 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:30:52 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 43D8UqqZ069910 for bugs@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:30:52 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 277886] ZFS boot loader gives up too easily on unsupported zpool flags Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:30:51 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 15.0-CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: loader X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: trasz@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated List-Id: Bug reports List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-bugs List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D277886 --- Comment #6 from Edward Tomasz Napierala --- >Personally I don't really like this idea, though, because it is not guaran= teed to work Well of course it's not. But the worst case we're risking here is what is currently the only case: a boot failure. >It would be much better to prevent the upgrade from happening on the boot = pool, and only allow it when boot environment is updated, instead. Fully agree, but that's a significant effort, while what I'm talking about might be a one line change. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=