Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2012 17:31:24 -0800 From: Matt Mullins <mokomull@gmail.com> To: Drew Tomlinson <drew@mykitchentable.net> Cc: Mark Felder <feld@feld.me>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, APseudoUtopia <apseudoutopia@gmail.com> Subject: Re: ZFS Root Won't Mount - Unknown Filesystem -- SOLVED Message-ID: <CAPyT1SH6P2fqGuOg3sn5rdiwBqDZ7z9DpvrQbArfQnQPNweU0Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F088283.7070407@mykitchentable.net> References: <4F08684C.2070809@mykitchentable.net> <op.v7p11mdv34t2sn@cr48.lan> <CAKOHg=OfKAbRbV120wX5roUBaSNLpC_Z1vT_zPdNDDpgoah8Ww@mail.gmail.com> <4F088283.7070407@mykitchentable.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Whoops, I missed this message before posting my reply a few minutes ago. On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Drew Tomlinson <drew@mykitchentable.net> wr= ote: > Yes, although I've read that 'zfs set mountpoint=3D/ zroot' is acceptable= as > well. =A0I set mine to "/" after trying to import pool with '-o altroot= =3D/mnt' > in LiveCD. =A0When mountpoint was "legacy", altroot didn't work right. > =A0Opinions on "/" vs. "legacy"? Most of the FreeBSD guides seem to think "legacy" is the way to go, but I much prefer "/" myself. The main difference is with "legacy", one sets a mountpoint option on each filesystem under it (which does, indeed, undermine the altroot facility), whereas "/" lets the other filesystems inherit their mountpoint from their path in the zpool. "/" seems to be a little closer to its Solaris usage, which is still the majority of the documentation you'll find on ZFS on the internet (and even in the man pages distributed with FreeBSD). -- Matt Mullins
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyT1SH6P2fqGuOg3sn5rdiwBqDZ7z9DpvrQbArfQnQPNweU0Q>