2012/11/3 Lev Serebryakov <l...@freebsd.org> > Hello, Alexander. > You wrote 3 ноября 2012 г., 16:14:21: > > AY> Hello all! > AY> Some time ago I got somewhere idea, that base OS should be RO - > readonly. > AY> And should be updated easily (ACID) and with possibility of fast > rollback. > Why it is better than nanobsd? >
Of course, that's all IMHO and fit for my usage: 1) Same FreeBSD, as in laptop/desktop, (e.g. really same - GENERIC kernel is used, without dropping any kerberos or else), and yes, I know that nanobsd can that; 2) .vmdk simply deployed into Esxi/virtualbox (not sure nanobsd can produce that) 3) Transparent /etc/ modifiying VS nanobsd approach (edit, don't forget mount /cfg, copy there;) 4) Only OS, no packages included - e.g. I can upgrade/downgrade packages without touching any byte of OS. Except for symlinks :) nanobsd specified that if you want packages - you need built them in. Of course differences not so big, and I'm not saying that my way is more better. It just raised question deep in me - why OS still aren't modularized, and most of it not in RO (while it should). Something like this > -- > // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <l...@freebsd.org> > > -- Regards, Alexander Yerenkow _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
