Re: Does anyone use kgzip / kgzldr?

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 6:35 PM, Ed Maste <emaste_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> Hiya, I wanted to forward this to you in case you're not reading -current at the moment so you don't miss it. A PR of yours from 2013 is the only recent evidence I found of someone using kgzldr :-)
> 

Not on -current -- didn't get the original (thanks for the forward).

> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ed Maste <emaste_at_freebsd.org <mailto:emaste_at_freebsd.org>>
> Date: 23 November 2015 at 20:25
> Subject: Does anyone use kgzip / kgzldr?
> To: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org>>
> 
> 
> I disconnected kgzldr from the build in r291113 because I thought
> kgzip was already disconnected. As it happens kgzip was disconnected
> only from the release builds, in r281658.
> 

nods.


> kgzip / kgzldr only works on i386, and for quite some time the
> recommended way to use a compressed kernel has been via loader(8). Is
> there a compelling use case for kgzldr and loader(8)-less i386 boot?

Custom media used by some enterprises. It certainly is not the norm, I'll say,
but it does work. Being "i386 only" isn't of much concern for, say, my previous
employer whereat I had modified the installer (sysinstall) to more-aggressively
sandbox itself, allowing it to do things like boot/execute i386 but lay down an
amd64 release (so long as a little bit of CPUID x86 ASM yielded a positive hit
on CPU LongMode).


> I'll reconnect kgzldr (on i386 only) if it's useful, or otherwise
> continue with the removal.
> 

I'd like to see it reconnected. I think that's what
we had discussed last.
-- 
Cheers,
Devin