From nobody Thu Nov 28 15:47:41 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@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 4XzggP2xQDz5dtHP for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2024 15:47:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dclarke@blastwave.org) Received: from mail.oetec.com (mail.oetec.com [108.160.241.186]) (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 ECDSA (P-256) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.oetec.com", Issuer "E6" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4XzggP2MrSz4KF6; Thu, 28 Nov 2024 15:47:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dclarke@blastwave.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from [172.16.35.3] (pool-99-253-118-250.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.253.118.250]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.oetec.com (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPSA id 4ASFlf3M030338 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 28 Nov 2024 10:47:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from dclarke@blastwave.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=blastwave.org; s=default; t=1732808863; bh=Cb0uK05e0xFhwEZ4997rd2RNx8PNLPt6mW+JZT7ZAbQ=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=qNFlpelBoEEo8PqaRq8NJ0uH+8oKw8yACBRqH0c9WHXQrPxMFXnJ6vKW8DmtNvq9F vR/UwbJOZrheZqkzlTxsVRX/yu9nQCONWD1L2HIpHnjhvLzr7yfESq9cxea3JlP5YD VxaGvWmt+WP6arzODLvlD5Ys6O0SLTDpsZxCQIjemNDpgBZ199ZpPj+YtWjtmm7gj5 ocgiqGUqmlooqawA4tjcNtBhGkdVP2OuVxYOD4HsHivPZbU7PfbLJo1brCBIrux4Pf nzyGDB1LdYKlfh6y2j32bogN54SsPQgHO/f5AIy0roCWfhJcew9b6Z+dzrVz8NnbPc t+LQ9i+i4q5vA== Message-ID: <722a3644-3af6-4ff9-b1ee-022c32872001@blastwave.org> Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 10:47:41 -0500 List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: zpools no longer exist after boot Content-Language: en-CA To: Alan Somers Cc: Current FreeBSD References: <5798b0db-bc73-476a-908a-dd1f071bfe43@blastwave.org> <22187e59-b6e9-4f2e-ba9b-f43944d1a37b@blastwave.org> From: Dennis Clarke Organization: GENUNIX In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-oetec-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-oetec-MailScanner-ID: 4ASFlf3M030338 X-oetec-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-oetec-MailScanner-From: dclarke@blastwave.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:812, ipnet:108.160.240.0/20, country:CA] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4XzggP2MrSz4KF6 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- On 11/28/24 09:52, Alan Somers wrote: > On Thu, Nov 28, 2024, 8:45 AM Dennis Clarke wrote: > ... > > For "zpool import", the "-c" argument instructs zfs which cachefile to > search for importable pools. "-O", on the other hand, specifies how the > cachefile property should be set after the pool is imported. > I have to wonder what value there is in NOT having the cachefile property set in a zpool ? Certainly given that the zpool RC script really wants to check in a few places and then use those cache files. -- -- Dennis Clarke RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC UNIX and Linux spoken