[ replying to an old thread, sorry ] On Nov 3, 2012, at 4:56 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > Hello, Alexander. > You wrote 4 ноября 2012 г., 2:12:03: > > AY> Quick glance to nanobsd give me impression that: > AY> 1) nanobsd is MBR based, so : > AY> 2) nanobsd is disk-name-change sensitive. > Here are patches to support GPT I'd love to see those... The mailing list must have eaten the original ones. > AY> GPT way is better - I'm using r${REV} as label, and root can be mounted no > AY> matter how many other "firmware's" present, or how disks are ordered. > > AY> BTW, due to bug 173309 I had to rebuild and update my server, which took > AY> only few minutes for reboot. > > AY> Well, nanobsd is great thing, I'll look into it a bit more, but it's goal > AY> to have minified FreeBSD, while I need read-only one. > No. Its goal is to have RO and ACID-upgradable system (with two code > slices for this). Yes. NanoBSD's way isn't the best, and if there's better ways for it to do its thing, then I'm all for updating it to cope better. I have a bit of a backlog of NanoBSD patches to get to, which is why this caught my eye, and since 9.1 will soon be a totally done deal, what better time to hack on NanoBSD and merge... WarnerReceived on Tue Dec 04 2012 - 20:44:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:32 UTC