Re: Bigger boot block size?
From: Jung-uk Kim (jkim_at_FreeBSD.org)
Date: 09/09/05
- Previous message: Maxim Konovalov: "Re: [CFR] reflect resolv.conf update to running application"
- In reply to: Peter Jeremy: "Re: Bigger boot block size?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 11:45:20 -0400
On Friday 09 September 2005 03:11 am, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 02:18:44PM -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> >I have been working on boot2 recently. I faced constant problem
> > with boot2 size limitation. Can we have bigger boot block size
> > (aka BBSIZE)? In the future, we may have to support different
> > file system to boot from and we won't have any space to add the
> > support without dropping UFS1 support.
>
> I don't see why we need a one-size-fits-all boot2. boot2 has to be
> installed onto a specific filesystem so there's no reason why we
> can't have different boot2 binaries for CD9660, UFS1, UFS2 etc.
Huh? boot2 is not installed onto a specific file system and cd9660 is
not supported natively AFAIK. '-C' option only lets you mount cd9660
as a root file system.
Jung-uk Kim
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Maxim Konovalov: "Re: [CFR] reflect resolv.conf update to running application"
- In reply to: Peter Jeremy: "Re: Bigger boot block size?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
