Here are some good arguments in favor of the mini_fo scheme that I didn't realize (forwarded with permission).
----- Forwarded message from Chris Li <[email protected]> ----- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 02:20:42 -0800 From: Chris Li <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Users] /overlay (was: OpenVPN and ntpd) [...] You wrote: >I suppose the rationale is to allow updating the squashfs partition >"underneath" your local modifications, but I'm not sure how well this >works in practice. If you're willing to just backup, upgrade, and >restore local settings, I frankly don't see the advantage over just >making the entire area used for root + overlay into a single >read-write filesystem using, say, ubifs. I did not figure this out until recently. Overlay has huge advantage. 1) Very easy to restore to factory setting. Clear the overlay, you reset to factory default. 2) Allow better compression of firmware(more usable flash) For the most part of the firmware, it is read only. Squashfs can make a much smaller compressed image than say ubifs. That is what it is designed for. The price to pay is, it is read only. So using squshfs+overlay can actually allow you have more usable flash than ubifs. Package like python take up much smaller flash when it is build into the squashfs than install as add on, which store on the overlay. Chris ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u _______________________________________________ openwrt-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-users
