Hi Richard On Sun, 21 May 2017 10:40:05 +0200 Richard Weinberger <rich...@nod.at> wrote:
> Geert, > > Am 21.05.2017 um 10:37 schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven: > > On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Ralph Sennhauser > > <ralph.sennhau...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> There is also the size consideration. Unless a seeded ubifs can get > >> close to squashfs in terms of compression there would still be a > >> use-case for squashfs with an ubifs overlay. My current root as > >> ubifs instead of squashfs is 76.8% bigger. > > > > As seeded files are stored and kept unmodified, they could be > > stored in compressed form? > > This is what UBIFS already does. Right, or it would be some 400-500% difference. Another advantage of the squashfs with overlay came to mind. OpenWrt doesn't do a factory reset per se but boots into a "failsafe" mode which just doesn't mount the overlay. This allows to fix the overlay (some screwed up config value which prevents connection) or to reset the password for example without having to reinstall packages and reconfigure the device from ground up. Wiping the overlay is basically the last resort. With the expectation distributions to use the same approach for as many devices possible I see the seeded ubifs running out of users fast. Some commercial vendor backporting it to a 3.10 kernel maybe? If the seeded ubifs could be generalized to snapshot support ala btrfs that would change things a lot as it would enable uses far beyond just factory reset. No idea how feasible that is but might be worth considering instead. Ralph > > Thanks, > //richard _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
