Re: Dropping edlabel in favour of 'disklabel -i'

2009/11/28 Izumi Tsutsui <[email protected]>:
>> i don't think this is a good idea:
>>
>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0text =C2=A0 =C2=A0data =C2=A0 =C2=A0 bss =C2=A0 =C2=A0 dec =
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 hex filename
>> =C2=A0 =C2=A09613 =C2=A0 =C2=A01016 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 600 =C2=A0 11229 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A02bdd /sbin/edlabel
>> =C2=A0 38654 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 904 =C2=A0 10120 =C2=A0 49678 =C2=A0 =C2=A0c2=
0e /sbin/disklabel
>>
>> one of the reasons edlabel exists was to to be smaller for media.
>
> One possible compromise is to move src/sbin/edlabel to
> src/distrib/utils/edlabel. Most size restriction is around
> initial bootstrap ramdisks to create miniroot.
> (used only on sun2 and sun3?)

I think that is an excellent suggestion.

So, new question - does anyone have any objections to relegating
edlabel to being used in extreme memory constrained install
situations, and not shipped with the normal userland?