On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Matthew Dillon <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I'll add one more thing re: use of /boot. We could also clean up
> the crypto bootstrapping to just use the /boot/rescue root instead of
> bootstrap image. That is, an unencrypted /boot (doesn't need to be
> encrypted anyway) and an encrypted normal root could be driven
entirely
> from the /boot/rescue environment.
>
> (If I understand the current crypto bootstrapping correctly).
If one takes that route, then /boot/rescue isn't (solely) about rescuing
things anymore, so perhaps consider calling it something else (possibly
revive the 4.4BSD /stand convention?). Or, just do away with the
subdirectory entirely and have these things in /boot/bin and /boot/sbin;
that seems simpler and more straight forward.
It strikes me that if one is booting into single user mode, one is most
often doing that to repair something; if that is true, then I would imagine
that chroot'ing into a /boot/rescue environment isn't all that useful.
Either mount /boot on root and have /boot/bin, /boot/sbin show up as /bin
and /sbin, or mount it over a pseudo-root as /boot and set $PATH for the
single user shell to refer to the right locations.
You had said before that you didn't care for the idea of a /rescue (if I
understood you correctly), and I asked why; I'm still very curious about
that?
- Dan C.
