> From: "Theo de Raadt" <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 10:02:40 -0700 > > An OpenBSD machine only has one OpenBSD install.
I have to disagree here. Not everyone has a pile of test machines lying around. > As soon as we leave that model, and allow other setup models, perhaps you > think there will be two or three potential configurations that people setup. > > I don't think so, I think it will keep being extended by people who do > more and more scewed up bizzare configurations, all of which (obviously, to > you) will need to be supported, and everything gets more complicated. > > I think we should say "STOP". Now. And not start down that roadmap. > > You built something for a testlab. Your conclusion is that it should > work for everyone. I simply cannot come to the same conclusion, > because it requires complexity, but instead I think we should embrace > simplicity even if it limits choice. Well, that is the real question: will this increase complexity? We currently have code that makes what I'd describe as an "educated guess" at what is the OpenBSD root disk of a machine. If we can replace that with something that finds the disk based on its DUID, that would make things more robust and might even decrease complexity in the installer. That said, I don't immediately see how this would work and how the sysctl's would help. So it would be good if Klemens showed us the complete picture. > Klemens Nanni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 07:49:11AM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > Klemens Nanni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > This is because the installer always considers the first root disk it > > > > finds as the one to upgrade, which is certainly not what I intend or > > > > expect when booting/upgrading the softraid installation on sd1-3. > > > > > > What does > > > > > > first root disk > > > > > > Mean? > > > > One machine with two phsyical disks, say one NVMe and regular SSD. > > Both disks contain a standalone OpenBSD installation. > > > > I consider each of them a root disk. > > > > > > > > There is only one root disk. The root disk is the one that actually > > > contains > > > the / that is mounted. > > > > > > It is this one: > > > > > > root on sd0a (fb786f6b01042b30.a) swap on sd0b dump on sd0b > > > > > > You cannot change this. If you use the bootloader to tell the kernel do > > > do something else, then I argue that sysupgrade and the installer should > > > punish you unless you *manually tell it that every time* > > > > I don't set anything in /etc/boot.conf or the boot> prompt. > > > > I select the disk to boot from in the UEFI boot manager. > > > > > > > > The install script knows what the root filesystem is using very simple > > > heuristics, but by creating two new sysctl, I am afraid you will enrich > > > this ability to support bizzare configurations that did not work, and > > > I argue *should never work*. > > > > > > > It is probably not that common to have multiple installations/root disks > > > > in one machine, but it isn't "weird" to me, either. > > > > > > What? It is not weird > > > > > > I think this is unsupported bullshit. > > > > > > Why do we need the install script to support this configuration you > > > created? Why do we need to encourage other people to have such > > > configurations? When they create such a configuration, and find the > > > tooling can support it, won't they go and do even stranger things, then > > > find the tooling doesn't support that even-stranger setup, and then > > > you'll come back adding support for increasingly strange setups, and > > > eventually we are going to end up with a large userbase *not using* a > > > single root filesystem? > > > > > > > Overwriting the wrong system during an upgrade because the installer > > > > makes too big of an assumption about the first disk is weird to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > I can post console logs later showing how the installer picks the wrong > > > > disk, if you want. > > > > > > There is only one possible root filesystem. > > > > > > If you created multiple root filesystems, you have created a mess and > > > why is it wrong for me to argue you need to experience pain for the > > > decisions that led you there? > > > > > > I do not think you are being honest about the reason for these extensions. > > > > > > > I'm pretty honest, but apparently not precise enough. > > > > Now that all the softraid/installboot diffs landed and the dust has > > settled, let me iterate over and test my setup again to make sure I'm > > not tripping over my own mistakes. > > > > Then I can come back with a clear update or reproducer. > > >
