Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 24 Apr 2016 08:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: NanoBSD (Was Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8))
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.1604240822170.1436@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfoKount-N__nRV8HRJbpMY98GZoY7nu5JmGy5AJL50Cfw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <E1asbZj-0003Ra-Qs@rmm6prod02.runbox.com> <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> <5716AD65.8070007@shrew.net> <BF66EA01-E073-45F0-8F9E-22D57E8871B0@bsdimp.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1604221915370.15755@minnie.bitsea.ca> <CANCZdfpH4W0eE9DDC3mwMmJ69styoT4fMPhNYUiiqLQ5a5ROoA@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.1604230946560.27238@sea.ntplx.net> <CANCZdfoKount-N__nRV8HRJbpMY98GZoY7nu5JmGy5AJL50Cfw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
> wrote:
>
>> [CC trimmed]
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I personally will be refraining from engaging further. I plan on seeing
>>> what gaps there are by adding support to NanoBSD for packages. I'll be
>>> busy
>>> with that. In talking to Glen and others, we've already identified a few
>>> easy gaps to fill. Once they've done that, I'll get going on NanoBSD with
>>> the goal to be able to use it to build a bootable system of any
>>> architecture from packages with no root privs. I expect to find issues,
>>> but
>>> I don't expect to find any issue that's intractable. I expect after the
>>> issues are resolved, the end product will be better for everybody.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for working on NanoBSD.  Do you think it would be possible
>> to add support for optionally building dump(8) images instead of dd?
>
>
> What do you  mean by that, exactly? It would be relatively easy to add
> a step that runs dump on the _.disk.image file and squirrel that away.
> Last orders the code currently calls it, I believe. Is it something as
> simple
> as this, or is there some more complexity that I'm failing to understand
> or grasp?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but when last_orders() is called,
isn't the disk already unmounted and 'mdconfig -d -u' already
run?

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.1604240822170.1436>