From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 24 16:16:45 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1F5A106566B for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:16:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) Received: from asmtpout026.mac.com (asmtpout026.mac.com [17.148.16.101]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E7C8FC14 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:16:45 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Received: from macbook-pro.jnpr.net (natint3.juniper.net [66.129.224.36]) by asmtp026.mac.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-8.01 (built Dec 16 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0L7N00A17ZV1WK70@asmtp026.mac.com> for freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:16:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=6.0.2-1004200000 definitions=main-1008240096 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.0.10011,1.0.148,0.0.0000 definitions=2010-08-24_09:2010-08-24, 2010-08-24, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 From: Marcel Moolenaar In-reply-to: <20100824155205.C2A535B23@mail.bitblocks.com> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:16:13 -0700 Message-id: References: <20100823.171201.107001114053031707.imp@bsdimp.com> <8C76250B-E272-4807-BD0D-9F50D0BC5E10@mac.com> <20100824002350.042A45B3B@mail.bitblocks.com> <4CB9F7C8-39E8-4C3B-A3F8-A5A9EC178E7D@mac.com> <20100824043344.CA4DE5B56@mail.bitblocks.com> <760A97A4-62D2-4900-915D-CA5D889855E1@mac.com> <20100824155205.C2A535B23@mail.bitblocks.com> To: Bakul Shah X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Cc: "freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org" Subject: Re: RFC: enhancing the root mount logic X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:16:45 -0000 On Aug 24, 2010, at 8:52 AM, Bakul Shah wrote: >> >> I see your point and buy into the argument, but not >> entirely. I explicitly mentioned "embedding" and so >> far your arguments include things like GENERIC being >> 10MB or Linux server startup. >> >> We're not exactly discussing the same thing are we? > > This friend's company used linux in an embedded system [it > was a fileserver product. Presumably the OS had to run in a > restricted environment since the FS space would be for their > customers' use + you don't want to have to reload the OS when > a disk dies! And yet you want the ability to upgrade your OS > s/w etc.] > > In my job[-2] we used FreeBSD as an embedded OS. IIRC we just > ran from a readonly flash FS as root. An upgrade was just a > new FS image, including kernel + utilities. Didn't Juniper > do something similar? Juniper's approach is still heavily rooted in PC-class H/W. With Book-E, ARM and MIPS products for the low(er)-end and in particular without these products having a real harddisk, the existing way has shown it's problems and limitations. Also: Juniper has hacked a few tools, including the kernel at large and md(4) in particular to implement features they needed/wanted, which I'd like to get away from. FYI, -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com