Jack Schwartz wrote:
> Karen Tung wrote:
>> Jack Schwartz wrote:
>>> Another idea for your consideration:
>>>
>>> change the manifest spec.  There is a
>>>     <base_include type="file"> type of entry.  We could introduce a
>>>     <base_include type="uncompress_file"> type of entry.  Then 
>>> bootroot_initialize could make a list of files which shouldn't be 
>>> compressed based on this, and can pass that file to bootroot_archive 
>>> for proper handling.
>>>
>>>     Thanks,
>>>     Jack
>>>   
>> It is a good idea to specify the additional list of files that shouldn't
>> be fiocompressed in the manifest.  It works well with the DC's goal
>> of having 1 single file to describe how the image is created.
>>
>> I have a slightly different suggestion.  I would do:
>>
>> <base_include type="file" fiocompress=false>
>>
>> The fiocompress is optional.  If not specified, it will be compressed.
>>
>> I think this is more clear than saying type="uncompressed_file", because
>> this uncompress_file concept is only when we do fiocompress.  For x86, 
>> there
>> won't be such option.
> To make this great idea even better, how about just "compress=false" 
> instead of "fiocompress=false".  That way, if in the future a different 
> kind of compression is utilized, the attribute name will still fit.
> 

Overall, the idea of making this an attribute in the manifest sounds 
reasonable.  A couple of things:

- dcfs will likely be used on x86 before too long, too, so don't design 
this too specifically for SPARC
- I would be hesitant to make the property name too general here; as Jan 
points out, this is really a workaround for a dcfs-specific limitation 
that may be fixed, so it's not clear that generalizing is beneficial

Dave

>     Thanks,
>     Jack
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --Karen
>>
>>> On 12/16/08 15:57, Jack Schwartz wrote:
>>>  
>>>> Hi everyone, especially Karen and Jan.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the dcfs / fiocompress issue with the bootroot:
>>>>
>>>> fiocompress is a per-file compression.  One solution to the issue 
>>>> which came up this morning around updating compressed files is to 
>>>> not compress the files which will be opened for update.  This should 
>>>> be only a few files*, such as database files, which need to keep 
>>>> most of their old data.
>>>>
>>>> * Note: even vi opens files O_RDONLY to read them in, then opens 
>>>> them O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_TRUNC to write out the changed version.
>>>>
>>>> To try to work around this in other ways seems limited.  Jan and I 
>>>> talked this morning about passing -e to svcadm to get around this 
>>>> problem when adding a service, but then what about devfsadm, where 
>>>> the problem also shows?  For now, I assume we'll copy an 
>>>> uncompressed file.
>>>>
>>>> In order to keep things simple, since there are only a few files 
>>>> which require this special handling, I suggest copying all, then 
>>>> recopying the few files which don't require compression.
>>>>
>>>> In fact, DC already does this for the files in 
>>>> boot/solaris/filelist.ramdisk (see bootroot_archive.py).  Perhaps 
>>>> this concept can be extended to include an additional list of 
>>>> files.  There are other solutions, but this one would likely plug 
>>>> into what is already in place in the easiest way.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>>    Thanks,
>>>>    Jack
>>>>
>>>>     
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> caiman-discuss mailing list
>>> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
>>>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caiman-discuss mailing list
> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss


Reply via email to