Tim Wood wrote:
Ideally, for me, there'd be a persistance configuration governing what is
persistant. Examples:
1) User wants to carry their data with them but not install packages
2) Someone wants package persistance
3) Someone wants a way to do custom configuration and then lock it down
So, maybe you can do the following types of things:
* specify paths that are persistant
* specify whether those paths are modifiable (e.g. lock it down)
* specify package persistance
This is actually not as doable for fedora since it uses dm-snapshot overlay
rather than unionfs for its cow magic.
OTOH, it is doable utilizing the alternate persistence method that I just
alluded to in the reply to JvM I just sent. The downside, is that unlike using
dm-snapshot overlay for persistence, implementing what you described would
require more user involvement. I.e. if you go create a file in your homedir,
then yank the plug on the computer, you would lose the file. Unlike with
dm-snapshot-overlay-persistence, in which the file would be there.
Admittedly, I've only given in 2-5 minutes of real thought, but I can't yet
think of any way to provide that fine grain level of control with
dm-snapshot-overlay as the persistence mechanism.
Though honestly I'm the sort of person that would say "hey, lets invite unionfs
back to the party for even more options" :) (though not for fedora8
timeframe... I'm not that crazy ;)
peace...
-dmc
Maybe looking like this ... using a psuedo syntax that just hit me:
[persistant paths]
/home/user(rw)
/etc(r)
[persistant packages]
*
[persistant options]
I guess the config would have to exist as say /etc/persistance.conf and be
part of the persistant archive. Then joe user could go in, and change the
/etc entry to (rw), reboot and then update a config file and then lock it
down again and reboot.
FWIW, this is somewhat similar to something I hacked together for a
customized Knoppix disk.
Timf Wood
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:25:56 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Douglas McClendon wrote:
Your preferred use case is certainly as valid or even moreso than the
one I presented. But having both options seems ideal. Also, there may
be an issue with usbflash data, and that in some instances it might be
better to have it be mostly preburned as squashfs, rather than treated
as a normal ext3fs. I.e. the whole jffs2 thing.
Well, I'm not against anything here, I'm sorry if it looked that way. It
just doesn't look like it's worth the effort to me personally.
Personally I rather like the idea of having my personal core system on
read-only media, with just my homedir on flash.
Right, that makes sense. A home directory from flash would be nice, but
it wouldn't be really 'system persistence' would it? yum install foo and
yum remove bar will not have foo and will have bar after a reboot, right?
Kind regards,
Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip
--
Fedora-livecd-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
--
Fedora-livecd-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
