On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 6:34 AM, Alexander Yerenkow <yeren...@gmail.com>wrote:
... Of course, that's all IMHO and fit for my usage: > ... > 2) .vmdk simply deployed into Esxi/virtualbox (not sure nanobsd can produce > that) > There's no reason why nanobsd couldn't (or shouldn't) do that. It's something that I thought about when the "Google Code In" announcement was sent out; honestly it's no more complicated than installing a port and running a few commands on the full disk image produced with nanobsd. > 3) Transparent /etc/ modifiying VS nanobsd approach (edit, don't forget > mount /cfg, copy there;) > I agree that /cfg doesn't make things transparent for end-users, but that's a feature (that could potentially be polished up with a one-liner command/alias). rc.initdiskless is the one that does the shuffling/stomping of files BTW. > 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. > You can do that with nanobsd too. People that use FreeNAS 8 frequently tried to do this :). > 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 > Thanks! -Garrett _______________________________________________ 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"
