From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Apr 14 14:00:54 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1723BB0FFC0 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:00:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0829213C8 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:00:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u3EE0qFd099001 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:00:53 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 208742] /boot/gptzfsboot boots kernel from another zpool (not root pool) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:00:52 +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: 10.2-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: avg@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@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 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:00:54 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D208742 --- Comment #12 from Andriy Gapon --- (In reply to Steven Hartland from comment #11) I've never conducted any survey on this, but my impression is that the shar= e of systems with multiple ZFS pools is not that great. Also, of those systems t= he share of systems where bootfs property of the boot pool is not set / defaul= t is even smaller. And the preparation for the change would be trivial given a sufficiently early heads-up warning. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=