On 2013-10-23 09:38, Eric van Gyzen wrote: > On 10/23/2013 08:30, Kimmo Paasiala wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Kimmo Paasiala <kpaas...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen <e...@vangyzen.net> wrote: >>>> I just installed 10.0-BETA1 using the [very cool] new automatic ZFS >>>> option. I noticed that /var/empty is not mounted read-only. I suspect >>>> it could be. I made it so, and sshd still seemed to work. >>>> >>>> Eric >>> I don't think there's a standard for how to break down the ZFS pool to >>> individual datasets. If the install made only a single dataset for >>> /var you would then effectively get a read-write /var/empty. The >> *The same applies* >> >>> applies if you install on UFS and don't assign a separate filesystem >>> for /var/empty like the default install does in fact. > There might not be a standard, but the installer does have a default > set, which includes a separate filesystem for /var/empty. I imagine > this was done specifically to make it read-only. Since that was not > done, it seems like an oversight. > > Eric > _______________________________________________ > 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" You have to be careful with marking the /var/empty read only, if you do it too soon the extract of base.txz fails.
This might be a good use of Colin Percival's 'firstboot' script -- Allan Jude _______________________________________________ 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"
