Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 23:22:04 -0700 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@webgiro.com> Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org>, "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: System unique identifier..... Message-ID: <199907220622.XAA00979@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 21 Jul 1999 12:49:14 %2B0200." <Pine.BSF.4.05.9907211246330.25946-100000@freja.webgiro.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > That's not quite true. It wouldn't be too hard to modify existant files, > > but writing new ones/truncating would take a lot of work. It's still not > > a great idea to try to use a file on the FS for storage of persistent > > data. Wouldn't it be possible to have the kernel itself read in persistent > > data (in some form such as getenv?) to be written to disk? That way, the > > boot loader could pass it easily, and not have to worry about storage. > > This may sound like a heresy to you, but... Why don't use the Forth blocks > for that? For what? Saving parametric data? That was always the plan, but the last thing I think anyone wants to do is rewrite the ffs code in Forth. > They were invented for that purpose. We can create the files > beforehand (under normal OS operation), then from the bootloader we can > read and modify them - I suppose writing to a disk block is much easier > than through the filesystem layer... Yes, that's what we've always discussed as being the most likely course of action. -- \\ The mind's the standard \\ Mike Smith \\ of the man. \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ -- Joseph Merrick \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199907220622.XAA00979>