Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:23:26 -0800
From:      Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com>
To:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc:        "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD current mailing list <current@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: boot0cfg -s vs. GEOM_PART_*?
Message-ID:  <F04BCAF6-2478-4724-A7E6-94BD43BE77DB@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <15566.1234900800@critter.freebsd.dk>
References:  <15566.1234900800@critter.freebsd.dk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Feb 17, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> In message <D1292F9E-BF53-443F-9E63-92D527A41A3B@mac.com>, Marcel  
> Moolenaar wri
> tes:
>
>> 1.  We need to expose the current bootcode through
>>    kern.geom.confxml
>
> No.
>
> No.
>
> NO.
>
> We do not want arbitrary large binary blobs in the confxml
> output.

I'm not going to start a discussion on arbitrariness
and largeness of bootcode. Instead, let me just ask:

Do you have alternatives?

-- 
Marcel Moolenaar
xcllnt@mac.com






Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F04BCAF6-2478-4724-A7E6-94BD43BE77DB>