Installer changes on master (does not effect release)
PeerCorps Trust Fund
ipc at peercorpstrust.org
Tue Dec 15 06:51:17 PST 2015
Since the topic is at hand.
Was there a technical reason why a disk partition tool isn't built into the installer?
As of 4.4.1 when configuring disks for installation, the installer still recommends using DOS, another *BSD or Linux to partition disks.
On 12/14/2015 09:53 PM, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Master has gotten an installer revamp w/regards to the partition
> Previously the installer used radically different arrangements for UFS
> vs HAMMER. UFS put an integrated boot+root on partition 'a', swap on 'b',
> and HAMMER put boot on 'a', swap on 'b', and root on 'd'. HAMMER installs
> also created a whole bunch of PFS's for various major directories such
> as /home.
> The new setup is more uniform. An 'a' boot, 'b' swap, 'd' root, and
> 'e' /build is created whether UFS or HAMMER is chosen. PFS's are no
> longer used. Instead, major directories which generally do not have
> to be backed up (such as /usr/obj) are put on /build and null-mounted
> to their appropriate places via the fstab. Major directories which
> typically do need to be backed up, such as (most of /var), /home, /usr,
> and /usr/local remain on the root filesystem.
> The new setup handles small drives (typically < 40GB) by not creating
> a separate /build partition. It still creates the /build directory
> infrastructure on the root filesystem and still creates the null-mounts,
> making it relatively easy for the user to manage later on if/when moving
> to a setup with more storage.
> I've been using this scheme very successfully at home and on servers
> for more than a year now and really like the flexibility and ease of
> management. The null mounts are a lot easier for users to manage than
> the hammer PFS's, and the separation reduces the chances of the root
> filesystem becoming corrupt during a crash.
> These changes also allow UFS installs to use encrypted roots which they
> could not before. While we recommend HAMMER over UFS generally, there
> are still a few cases where UFS is more convenient, such as on small
> storage media / USB flash drives.
> Matthew Dillon
> <dillon at backplane.com>
More information about the Users