> The question is, is there any reason to keep the existing machinery > for specifying a fixed device name via the BOOTDISK make variable?
The only reason is there was no way to specify boot device independent format in fstab(5) when I wrote the bootimage support. (PR/45153 and PR/45155, back in 2012) > Or in other words, can anyone think of an architecture or type of disk > image where the "ROOT." reference might not work, or where a > hard-coded root disk device in /etc/fstab might otherwise be > desirable? I have not tried "ROOT." syntax but it should work as MI monor, I think. > The "build.sh live-image" target currently builds two live images each > for i386 and amd64, with names containing "-wd0root" and "-sd0root", > respectively. With the proposed change, these would become almost > identical, differing only in size and the OMIT_SWAPIMG setting, and > probably ought to be merged into one. OMIT_SWAPIMG was added to save time of dd'ing sd0root images to memory sticks. wd0root images include swap partition for emulators. Note one more TODO item is to use makefs(8) -O (offset) option like src/distrib/utils/embedded/mkimage, to avoid concat MBR + ffs image files. --- Izumi Tsutsui
