Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:10:10 -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: <E842D9CC-DEA8-4198-825F-46ED29437AE0@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <16288.1234906653@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <16288.1234906653@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 17, 2009, at 1:37 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > 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? And how do these not apply to ioctls? -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E842D9CC-DEA8-4198-825F-46ED29437AE0>