Re: DragonFly 3.4 release planning
Dan Cross <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.dragonfly-bsd.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAEoi9W4Nqo_AzNaQmjhnL0G-v4Q9pym1A1w_ttdorW+81c1gDQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Matthew Dillon <[email protected]> wrote: > I'll add one more thing re: use of /boot. We could also clean up > the crypto bootstrapping to just use the /boot/rescue root instead of > bootstrap image. That is, an unencrypted /boot (doesn't need to be > encrypted anyway) and an encrypted normal root could be driven entirely > from the /boot/rescue environment. > > (If I understand the current crypto bootstrapping correctly). If one takes that route, then /boot/rescue isn't (solely) about rescuing things anymore, so perhaps consider calling it something else (possibly revive the 4.4BSD /stand convention?). Or, just do away with the subdirectory entirely and have these things in /boot/bin and /boot/sbin; that seems simpler and more straight forward. It strikes me that if one is booting into single user mode, one is most often doing that to repair something; if that is true, then I would imagine that chroot'ing into a /boot/rescue environment isn't all that useful. Either mount /boot on root and have /boot/bin, /boot/sbin show up as /bin and /sbin, or mount it over a pseudo-root as /boot and set $PATH for the single user shell to refer to the right locations. You had said before that you didn't care for the idea of a /rescue (if I understood you correctly), and I asked why; I'm still very curious about that? - Dan C.