Re: booting gbde-encrypted filesystem

2005-07-29 Thread Pawel Jakub Dawidek
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 01:18:10PM +0800, Ronnel P. Maglasang wrote: + Hello, + + I think there was already a thread on this. I just + want to raise the question again if anyone has successfully + booted an gdbe-encrypted filesystem (everything encrypted except + the bootloader). The passphrase

Re: booting gbde-encrypted filesystem

2005-07-29 Thread Jeremie Le Hen
This is not not possible with current GBDE. I've patches which allows this here: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/gbde.patch This is great. Do you intend to commit it someday ? I know the GELI framework allows to use an encrypted root partition, but it would be interesting for

Re: booting gbde-encrypted filesystem

2005-07-29 Thread Pawel Jakub Dawidek
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 09:56:18AM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: + This is not not possible with current GBDE. + I've patches which allows this here: + + http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/gbde.patch + + This is great. Do you intend to commit it someday ? I know the GELI + framework

Re: booting gbde-encrypted filesystem

2005-07-29 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alexander Leidinger writes: Pawel Jakub Dawidek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is not not possible with current GBDE. I've patches which allows this here: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/gbde.patch I fail to see how this allows an encryted root-FS, it

Re: booting gbde-encrypted filesystem

2005-07-29 Thread Alexander Leidinger
Pawel Jakub Dawidek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is not not possible with current GBDE. I've patches which allows this here: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/gbde.patch I fail to see how this allows an encryted root-FS, it doesn't add gbde support to boot0(ext) or to the

swap reservation accounting

2005-07-29 Thread Kostik Belousov
Hello everyone, I developed the patch for 7-CURRENT (also should apply cleanly to 6) that implements swap reservation accounting and allows to cap the allocation of anonymous memory to the available swap. Effectively, this allows to optionally turn off overcommit feature of the VM. Besides this,

Re: [RFC] Add usr/ports to BSD.usr.mtree

2005-07-29 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:24:44PM +0800, Xin LI wrote: My points to have /usr/ports in the mtree is for convience that users creating a jail that is intended to mount the ports tree from the host system, without having to create their own in every instances. What do you think about this? My

Re: [RFC] Add usr/ports to BSD.usr.mtree

2005-07-29 Thread Xin LI
Hi, Joerg, On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 04:43:49PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:24:44PM +0800, Xin LI wrote: My points to have /usr/ports in the mtree is for convience that users creating a jail that is intended to mount the ports tree from the host system,

mfs/mdconfig under RELENG_5: malloc vs swap-backed

2005-07-29 Thread Dmitry Morozovsky
Dear colleagues, can anyone please point me why mdconfig method for tmpmfs is malloc-backed instead of swap-backed, and it is hardcoded into rc.subr? Are swap-backed file systems so inefficient? If no, why not move -M to /etc/defaultc/rc.conf so admin can override this behaviour? Sincerely,

Re: mfs/mdconfig under RELENG_5: malloc vs swap-backed

2005-07-29 Thread Bernd Walter
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 09:41:24PM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: Dear colleagues, can anyone please point me why mdconfig method for tmpmfs is malloc-backed instead of swap-backed, and it is hardcoded into rc.subr? Are swap-backed file systems so inefficient? If no, why not move -M to