Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:20:00 +0900 From: Tomoya Tabuchi <t@tomoyat1.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GSoC Project Involving the reimplementation of beadm(1) Message-ID: <20170221132000.GA11545@tomoyat1.com> In-Reply-To: <20170220134910.GC15630@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20170220131509.GA31623@tomoyat1.com> <20170220134910.GC15630@zxy.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 04:49:10PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:15:09PM +0900, Tomoya Tabuchi wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I am interested in doing a GSoC project this year with the idea "Write a > > new boot environment manager" on the ideas list. > > (https://wiki.freebsd.org/SummerOfCodeIdeas#Write_a_new_boot_environment_manager) > > > > I would like to ask a few questions involving this. > > First, is there a particular reason why this project is listed in the > > ideas list? Aside the fact the current implementation in sh is rather > > complicated, I was unable to come up with a reason to justify the > > reimplementation. > > > > Second, is making the new implmentation of beadm(1) platform independent > > and promoting it across the various OpenZFS implmentation / communities > > as some sort of "standard" implmentation a good idea, or is it > > over-zealous / outside of the project scope / intrusive to other > > projects. > > > > As for a late self introduction, my name is Tomoya Tabuchi, and I am a > > undergraduate student at Doshisha University in Japan. I will start my > > third year in university in April. > > Don't know about link above. For me, current beadm have some leaks: > > 1. Don't check cosistency before applay: > I am try to enable beadm on 10.1 install and switch to 11.0. > fail. That is interesting. I'll try and see if I can reproduce that, and observe what's going on. > > 2. Need to control what put under beadm. Does this mean to hold back on feature bloat, or to distinguish between ZFS clones created by beadm and ones that were not? If you mean the latter, I'll take a look at the current behaviour when manually created ZFS clones are involved. > > All of this don't need to rewrite all beadm, IMHO. Thank you for your views. Tomoya
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170221132000.GA11545>