Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:02:36 +0000 From: Ulf Lilleengen <ulf.lilleengen@gmail.com> To: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, FreeBSD current mailing list <current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: boot0cfg -s vs. GEOM_PART_*? Message-ID: <20090218170236.GB76148@carrot> In-Reply-To: <20090218170043.GA76148@carrot> References: <16678.1234910124@critter.freebsd.dk> <B0DD65C3-4792-47C4-9BBE-E33BD58EA537@mac.com> <20090218170043.GA76148@carrot>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 05:00:43PM +0000, Ulf Lilleengen wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 04:19:55PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > > On Feb 17, 2009, at 2:35 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > > > In message <E842D9CC-DEA8-4198-825F-46ED29437AE0@mac.com>, Marcel > > > Moolenaar wri > > > tes: > > > > > >>> In message <D29A6039-5105-49CB-B613-DD561CDD1A89@mac.com>, Marcel > > >>> Moolenaar wri > > >>> tes: > > >>> > > >>>> For boot0cfg this is probably acceptable, because > > >>>> it only operates on MBRs. But as a generic solution > > >>>> this won't work. > > >>> > > >>> Then pick up the bootcode via ioctls, it does not belong > > >>> in the confxml sysctl. > > >> > > >> On what grounds doesn't it belong in the confxml? > > > > > > Because the way we (currently) implement confxml and the uses it is > > > put to would generally be greatly inconvenienced if you have to > > > include > > > 8KB of hexdump data in the xml stream. > > > > > >> And how do these not apply to ioctls? > > > > > > ioctls was designed and built to move binary blobs across the > > > userland/kernel barrier to and from I/O devices. > > > > How about the way that was done in GEOM_MBR? Defining a verb like "write > MBR", and supply the mbr as a parameter with gctl? (Currently used by > boot0cfg). Ah, like phk@ mentioned in an older reply :) -- Ulf Lilleengen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090218170236.GB76148>