Re: possible mountroot regression

Hi,

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> wro=
te:
>>>> On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Oliver Pinter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/19/11, Olivier Smedts <olivier@gid0.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2011/10/19 Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 18, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would you be able to commit a variant of this patch sans the 'x' p=
art?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, soonish. If people like the 'x' change I can do that in a foll=
owup
>>>>>>> commit as well. I just need to know if people like it or not...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it's useful. But why not "q" for "quit" ? Just a bikeshed color
>>>>>> idea...
>>>>>>
>>>>> eXit :)
>>>>
>>>> In some languages...
>>>>
>>>> More important to me is the "the Abort manual input" which tells what =
it
>>>> does but not why the user would want to do that.
>>>>
>>>> Abort manual input... and then what? =A0Hang? =A0Retry? =A0Panic? =A0R=
eboot? Resume
>>>> attempting to mount the root device that was expected?
>>>
>> well, panic, there isn't much other thing to do. At the very least,
>> letting the user input something is still better than what Linux do,
>> which is to panic.
>>
>>> Or just go back to status quo for previous releases and we can worry
>>> about usability later?
>>>
>> which status-quo ? the mountroot procedure of 7 is broken as well, as
>> I found out yesterday. So what ? 6 ? 5 ? 4 ?
>
> =A0 =A0The status quo that I was thinking of was press enter to get a
> list of available devices instead of immediately panicking like the
> new bootloader code currently does. As long as that status quo is
> restored, I think a lot of existing users will be happy. Otherwise
> this discussion could stall and turn into an unnecessary bikeshed.
>
this discussion should not even have happen, and I'd hope[0] that the
next message in this thread is either a new patch, or a revision ID
where the stuff is fixed, ie. less talk, more action.

Btw, if no action is taken, I do not really care, I'm running my patch
and am happy with it.

 - Arnaud

[0]: which is pretty much worthless
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"