From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 2 15:16:28 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB60E106567C for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 15:16:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mad@madpilot.net) Received: from megatron.madpilot.net (megatron.madpilot.net [88.149.173.206]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5B58FC1F for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 15:16:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mad@madpilot.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by megatron.madpilot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07E11130C08; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 15:58:57 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at madpilot.net Received: from megatron.madpilot.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (megatron.madpilot.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fEc30RbEDKX7; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 15:58:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from wedge.madpilot.net (wedge.madpilot.net [172.24.42.11]) by megatron.madpilot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 15:58:54 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <490DC02E.7020701@madpilot.net> Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:58:54 +0100 From: Guido Falsi User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080927) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Schuller References: <20081101114717.0ffc2ec8@valhala> <200811011517.37640.lists@jnielsen.net> <20081102144842.GA59552@hyperion.scode.org> In-Reply-To: <20081102144842.GA59552@hyperion.scode.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nicolas Martyanoff , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, John Nielsen Subject: Re: ZFS for a desktop computer X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:16:28 -0000 Peter Schuller wrote: > I appreciate that supporting direct booting off of ZFS is not easy to > implement, and this is not any kind of complaint. I just want to > respond to the claim that there is no appeal to having it supported. I > doubt I am alone in thinking it would be great to boot natively off > ZFS, even if not every one under the sun agrees :) > Just to cast a "vote" I subscribe to this opinion. It would be great...In fact if direct boot from ZFS was supported I'd convert my work PC to AMD64+ZFS immediately. At home it would be hardware since my PCs have at most 512 Mb ram, which is more than enough for what I do here. -- Guido Falsi