Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 03:01:19 +0200 From: Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org> To: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD installers and future direction Message-ID: <51A15EDF.6050600@erdgeist.org> In-Reply-To: <51A14445.4060305@freebsd.org> References: <51A0DC3F.9030301@cran.org.uk> <CAK6u07WDZrWU4dnrBzQGYf%2BpbmibK7KxSUZyvie8jJQ1SMODuw@mail.gmail.com> <51A1025A.2020607@cran.org.uk> <51A14445.4060305@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26.05.13 01:07, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > I'm not aware of any movement there (on either side of the table). I'd > personally be very suspicious of an all-sh(1) future -- by far the > cleanest parts of bsdinstall are in C -- and this is especially true for > interacting with geom. That said, since I've lost nearly all of my free > time and ability to work on bsdinstall, I won't get in the way of anyone > else working on things As discussed at BSDCan, I'd be willing to participate in the development and at least implement setting up zpools/zfs and geli/gbde providers. I have done similar things in sh in my ezjail tools and think I can glue the rest together. Scanning through the pc-sysinstall code, I find nothing too fancy there regarding either interaction with zfs nor geom tools. I do not think it is necessary as a back end just for these features. Nathan, is there any design rationale available for the scripts, e.g. on why you chose sh versus C and were you provided with some kind of wish list/requirements in the first place? Any particular mail thread to scan through beforehand? Regards, erdgeist
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51A15EDF.6050600>