Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:15:55 -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:  <D29A6039-5105-49CB-B613-DD561CDD1A89@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <15768.1234902459@critter.freebsd.dk>
References:  <15768.1234902459@critter.freebsd.dk>

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

On Feb 17, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> In message <F04BCAF6-2478-4724-A7E6-94BD43BE77DB@mac.com>, Marcel  
> Moolenaar wri
> tes:
>
>>> 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?
>
> Open the parent device, use read(2) to get it.
>
> You can always open an geom device for reading (subject
> to filesystem permissions).

For boot0cfg this is probably acceptable, because
it only operates on MBRs. But as a generic solution
this won't work.

-- 
Marcel Moolenaar
xcllnt@mac.com






Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D29A6039-5105-49CB-B613-DD561CDD1A89>