Re: boot0cfg -s vs. GEOM_PART_*?

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk_at_phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 08:13:15 +0000
In message <B0DD65C3-4792-47C4-9BBE-E33BD58EA537_at_mac.com>, Marcel Moolenaar wri
tes:

>I'll consider this.
>
> From my perspective:
>
>o   The fact that we have a separate OAM interface that
>     doesn't use file descriptors (at the application
>     level), having to use ioctl(2) all of a sudden is...
>     well... odd. Likewise for regular read/write. Just
>     for boot code do we need o worry about mapping GEOM
>     names to device special files.

You can use g_ctl instead of ioctl if you want, it just
does not belong in the xml.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk_at_FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Wed Feb 18 2009 - 07:13:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:42 UTC