svn commit: r256343 - in head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall: . scripts

[Teske, Devin]

On Oct 12, 2013, at 12:26 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:

> On 10/11/13 22:41, Devin Teske wrote:
>> Author: dteske
>> Date: Fri Oct 11 20:41:35 2013
>> New Revision: 256343
>> URL: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/256343&k=%2FbkpAUdJWZuiTILCq%2FFnQg%3D%3D%0A&r=Mrjs6vR4%2Faj2Ns9%2FssHJjg%3D%3D%0A&m=LDzuPpXPP4D5BzfISZjw%2BXitYn4aKVzfXzcrmMNFo2U%3D%0A&s=3d0963d9c497f7bad0918888032ca62844580612dc48ab3a8a6768fe640c365b
>> 
>> Log:
>>  Add zfsboot module as an option for automatic configuration. Default is
>>  to run interactively but it can be scripted too (optinally completely
>>  non-interactive). Currently supports GELI and all ZFS vdev types. Also
>>  performs validation on selections/settings providing error messages if
>>  necessary, explaining (in plain language) what the issue is. Currently
>>  the auto partitioning of naked disks only supports GPT and MBR (VTOC8
>>  pending for sparc64), so is only available for i386/amd64 install.
>> 
>>  Submitted by:	Allan Jude <freebsd at allanjude.com>, myself
>>  Reviewed by:	Allan Jude <freebsd at allanjude.com>
>>  Approved by:	re (glebius)
> 
> Hi Devin --
> 
> As was discussed on the mailing list, this patch still has some issues
> that need to be resolved,

Can you kindly provide links? I'm crawling through the mailing lists and
not finding anything for the October, (current, stable, sysinstall, ... ?? others?)

Do I need to be looking back in September? I wouldn't think so, because that
bit wasn't even in our development tree until October 1st:

http://druidbsd.cvs.sf.net/viewvc/druidbsd/bsdinstall_zfs/usr.sbin%3A%3Absdconfig%3A%3Ashare%3A%3Adevice.subr.patch?revision=1.1&view=markup

So there couldn't have been any discussion on it before then. So I'm just not
able to find the mailing lists where all the action is that they're discussing it.
Would be nice to find where the action is, so I could participate.


> for example the use of camcontrol
> unconditionally even when the disks may not be CAM

Allan Adds:
9.2 should have all disks listed in camcontrol, so it shouldn't be an issue

And:
I think the only systems without cam based disks are old 8.x - we're only targeting 10 anyway.

I tend to agree with those statements.


> and destruction of
> existing sub-partitioning for MBR disks.

I think we both (Allan and I) actually responded directly to you on this one.

We have code that handles that. It's in there.
-- 
Devin

_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.