--1ou9v+QBCNysIXaH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 07:25:10PM +1000, Daniel Carosone wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:05:52AM +0200, Jachym Holecek wrote:
> > That's an obvious and failsafe approach. The invariant of "single
> > user always on real root" prove _very_ useful while testing at the
> > least though.
>=20
> Sure, and if you boot -s, that's where you end up.  Personally, I so
> rarely shut *back* down to single user without rebooting that I tend
> to even forget it can be done.

i do it all the time.  as probably the only person who is using the
current patch i find it very useful to be able to drop back to the
original root file system and the ability to change the chroot target
seems desirable.

> > > Yeah, it's not like any changes you make at single-user in the md
> > > root are going to be permanent.
> >=20
> > Note that the scheme isn't md-specfic in any way -- you can boot off
> > an USB flash disk and migrate to a cgd@wd0 multi-user (ch)root.
>=20
> That example illustrates exactly where the chroot trick, nice though
> it is, falls down: what happens when the flash widget is removed and
> real-/ has to detach?  For that reason, you'd use the md.

what happens when you have your / on usb drive and unplug it?  what's
the difference?

unless there is a way to free the initial ramdisk from memory entirely,
what you propose seems like a lame design to me.

why isn't the real bug in gettyent() fixed instead of shooting your own
feet with abandoning the possibility to return back?


regards,

--=20
-- Lubomir Sedlacik <salo@{NetBSD,Xtrmntr,silcnet}.org>   --

--1ou9v+QBCNysIXaH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCpFdCiwjDDlS8cmMRAtD5AJwKCs7QZ8iaUityp/YHNYyajiGW8wCdGV43
6DLg2TepjTIk+WqWVsRAWBE=
=tXJZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--1ou9v+QBCNysIXaH--