Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 18:49:31 -0800 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@Dataplex.Net> Cc: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Mikael Karpberg <karpen@ocean.campus.luth.se>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: boot floppy banner Message-ID: <199802060249.NAA02350@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 05 Feb 1998 20:36:09 CST." <l03130305b1002554cbed@[208.2.87.4]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> With all these boot.XXXX files, and stuff, isn't it time for doing > >> /boot/XXXX instead? Seems to me the root should have as few files as > >> possible. > > > >Last time I proposed that, Bruce was rather unhappy about it. IMHO > >it's the right approach though. > > I imagine that his objection is that he will either need to understand > each fs directory structure or go through even more special code to force > things into fixed locations. The current bootstrap code (AFAIR) understands directories just fine. The restriction for UFS bootstrap filesystems would remain. > Personally, I would like to see "/" purged of everything possible. > However, I would like to add a "/.rc" file to be used as a stub in > place of "/etc/rc". This would permit me to have a way to mount > "/etc" as a read-only file system and still maintain a writeable root > in a mfs. Why should you want /etc/rc writable? -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802060249.NAA02350>