Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Daniel Eischen <deischen_at_freebsd.org>
wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Daniel Eischen <deischen_at_freebsd.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen <deischen_at_freebsd.org>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [CC trimmed]
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I personally will be refraining from engaging further. I plan on seeing
>>>>>> what gaps there are by adding support to NanoBSD for packages. I'll be
>>>>>> busy
>>>>>> with that. In talking to Glen and others, we've already identified a
>>>>>> few
>>>>>> easy gaps to fill. Once they've done that, I'll get going on NanoBSD
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> the goal to be able to use it to build a bootable system of any
>>>>>> architecture from packages with no root privs. I expect to find
>>>>>> issues,
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> I don't expect to find any issue that's intractable. I expect after
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> issues are resolved, the end product will be better for everybody.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for working on NanoBSD.  Do you think it would be possible
>>>>> to add support for optionally building dump(8) images instead of dd?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What do you  mean by that, exactly? It would be relatively easy to add
>>>> a step that runs dump on the _.disk.image file and squirrel that away.
>>>> Last orders the code currently calls it, I believe. Is it something as
>>>> simple
>>>> as this, or is there some more complexity that I'm failing to understand
>>>> or grasp?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Perhaps I'm missing something, but when last_orders() is called,
>>> isn't the disk already unmounted and 'mdconfig -d -u' already
>>> run?
>>>
>>
>>
>> dump 0f - _.disk.image > ~/foo.dump
>>
>> worked for me just now. Is there some reason that it wouldn't work for
>> you in last orders if you tossed a NANO_DISKIMGDIR in front of it
>> and last orders would work for you. You could even pipe it into some
>> compression program...
>>
>
> Huh, I didn't know you could do that on the image file.
> I feel dumb, now ;-)


Don't feel too dumb. If I specify foo.dump as the filename, dump kinda loses
its mind when it gets to the end of file. Not sure why.

Warner