Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 9 Sep 2005 11:45:20 -0400
From:      Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Bigger boot block size?
Message-ID:  <200509091145.27676.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050909071132.GA9121@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
References:  <200509081418.47794.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20050909071132.GA9121@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 09 September 2005 03:11 am, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 02:18:44PM -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> >I have been working on boot2 recently.  I faced constant problem
> > with boot2 size limitation.  Can we have bigger boot block size
> > (aka BBSIZE)?  In the future, we may have to support different
> > file system to boot from and we won't have any space to add the
> > support without dropping UFS1 support.
>
> I don't see why we need a one-size-fits-all boot2.  boot2 has to be
> installed onto a specific filesystem so there's no reason why we
> can't have different boot2 binaries for CD9660, UFS1, UFS2 etc.

Huh?  boot2 is not installed onto a specific file system and cd9660 is 
not supported natively AFAIK.  '-C' option only lets you mount cd9660 
as a root file system.

Jung-uk Kim



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200509091145.27676.jkim>