From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon May  3 05:21:14 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A876516A4CE; Mon,  3 May 2004 05:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org (melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org
	[82.225.155.84])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 519BD43D5C; Mon,  3 May 2004 05:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from thomas@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: by melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 80B1E2A42B; Mon,  3 May 2004 14:21:16 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 14:21:16 +0200
From: Thomas Quinot <thomas@FreeBSD.ORG>
To: current@freebsd.org, audit@freebsd.org, phk@freebsd.org,
	pb@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040503122116.GA47228@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org>
References: <20040501223031.GA10624@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040501223031.GA10624@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org>
X-message-flag: WARNING! Using Outlook can damage your computer.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Subject: Re: Mounting root through devfs
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 12:21:14 -0000

* Thomas Quinot, 2004-05-02 :

> An interesting use of this option is to mount a root file system by
> FFS volume label (using GEOM_VOL), without needing to know what hardware
> identifier will be assigned to it.

Hum, actually, further testing revealed that this should have worked
with -CURRENT without resorting to any patch. I must have messed up
something when initially determining that this did not work.

> If I understand the comment just above the definition of g_dev_clone,
> integration of this patch would allow removal of a questionable hack.

The patch could still be an improvement from an architectural
perspective for this reason.

Thomas.

-- 
    Thomas.Quinot@Cuivre.FR.EU.ORG