On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Amitabh Kant <amitabhk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:49 PM, Jan Henrik Sylvester <m...@janh.de> wrote: > >> On 01/-10/-28163 20:59, Amitabh Kant wrote: >> >>> I am trying to customise the bsdinstall auto script. I can mount the iso >>> (amd64 arch / 9.0 RELEASE) and change the shell script as per my >>> requirement. Once I try to re-create the iso file using mkisofs utility, >>> the size of the final iso increases by 100 MB if -J (joliet) mode is >>> used. >>> If I remove the joliet mode, it still increases by around 97 MB. Even if >>> no >>> changes are made to any of the files, the result is same. >>> >>> The process I have followed is as follows: >>> # mkdir /usr/iso >>> # cd /usr/iso >>> # dd if=/dev/cd0 of=org.iso bs=2048 >>> # mdconfig -a -t vnode -f org.iso -u 0 >>> # mount_cd9660 /dev/md0 /mnt >>> # mkdir staging >>> # cd staging >>> # rsync -a /mnt/ . >>> With Joliet mode >>> # mkisofs -J -R -V CustomBSD -no-emul-boot -b boot/cdboot -iso-level 3 -o >>> /usr/iso/my_custom.iso . >>> Without Joliet mode >>> # mkisofs -R -V CustomBSD -no-emul-boot -b boot/cdboot -iso-level 3 -o >>> /usr/iso/my_custom1.iso . >>> >>> The original iso is 612M, custom.iso is 712M and custom1.iso is 709M. >>> >>> System details: FreeBSD amd64 9.0 RELEASE running inside a virtualbox >>> with >>> 2GB RAM. >>> >>> Where am I going wrong? >>> >> >> There are many hardlinked files on the iso images. By the procedure >> above, you have them included multiple times. >> >> From the rsync manpage: "Note that -a does not preserve hardlinks, >> because finding multiply-linked files is expensive. You must separately >> specify -H." >> >> You will probably want "-cache-inodes" for mkisofs as well (and maybe >> other options). Or you could look at src/release/amd64/mkisoimages.**sh >> for the use of "makefs -t cd9660". >> >> Cheers, >> Jan Henrik >> > > Tried -H with rsync and -cache-inodes in mkisofs. Saw the mkisoimages.sh > and used the same parameters (at least to my understanding), still with the > same result. The only thing left to try is to get it running on a dedicated > machine rather than in a virtualbox. > > Amitabh > Same result on a dedicated machine too. Amitabh _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
