[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACuV5sBkTAWp=zW4m42UCy6qiYaAgrabMiHxStM4Ro-m=Ky5yw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 07:39:27 +0000
From: Zenny <garbytrash@...il.com>
To: owl-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Customizing Owl to fit in a small sized USB Stick or CF
On 3/26/12, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 06:42:09AM +0000, Zenny wrote:
>> Actually, I was expecting some script equivalent to NanoBSD (you know
>> what I meant) in Owl which can produce CF images like voyage linux,
>> based on debian-live, for 32- and 64-bit archs. Is there something in
>> the making?
>
> Gremlin had patches to add a new make target that would generate flash
> images instead of ISOs. I think those were primarily intended for
> installing systems from, and they were for larger flash devices (1 GB
> being considered the minimum anyone would likely happen to have handy
> anyway).
Great info. Do you mean this one:
ftp://ftp.gremlin.people.openwall.com/pub/linux/Owl/INSTALL/?
> Frankly, I failed to find time to review and merge those
> patches - perhaps we should revisit this topic on owl-dev soon.
With ZFS on Linux (ZoL) and BTRFS in the horizon, it seemed as such a
script would be nice to separate OS from the data. With ro CF/USB with
an encrypted data volume implemented in Owl would indeed be awesome!
(See below, too)
>
> As to producing smaller flash images intended for actual use (rather
> than installing systems from), there has been no effort to automate this
> so far, as far as I'm aware.
>
> Thank you for indicating your interest in this. Many things are done
> (or not done) in response to demand (or lack thereof), so it is
> important to have feature requests like yours.
Thanks that you appreciate interest in new features. Have you ever
though to HAMMER filestystem from DragonflyBSD to port? I am
optimistic that Owl team could port HAMMER to Owl (as you already have
ported several of the BSD utilities).
Though HAMMER is not as feature rich as ZFS (does not have a volume
management but uses LVM), but I feel it safe to be in the BSD userland
than the rogue stuffs under Oracle. On top of that HAMMER uses much
less memory to do the same stuffs that ZFS can do. The only feature
lacking is master-master replication whereas master-slave replication
is already there.
The following could be some links:
§0 http://www.dragonflybsd.org/hammer/
§1 http://www.dragonflybsd.org/hammer/hammer.pdf
§2 http://dl.wolfpond.org/Hammer-Presentation.en.pdf
It seems hammer2 will have some improvements over hammer1. Matt Dillon
has already released a roadmap on hammer 2 last month at
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/users/2012-02/msg00020.html
I would indeed love to see HAMMER happen in Owl to integrate
enterprise grade security with an enterprise grade storage system to a
new level! ;-)
Let us make Owl-enterprise-ready! ;-) Just my two kopeks!
>
> Alexander
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
