[Fedora-livecd-list] RFC- 'persistance' is on LiveCD wishlist- what does it mean?
Douglas McClendon
dmc.fedora at filteredperception.org
Thu Jul 19 18:22:48 UTC 2007
Tim Wood wrote:
> Ideally, for me, there'd be a persistance configuration governing what is
> persistant. Examples:
>
> 1) User wants to carry their data with them but not install packages
> 2) Someone wants package persistance
> 3) Someone wants a way to do custom configuration and then lock it down
>
>
> So, maybe you can do the following types of things:
>
> * specify paths that are persistant
> * specify whether those paths are modifiable (e.g. lock it down)
> * specify package persistance
>
This is actually not as doable for fedora since it uses dm-snapshot overlay
rather than unionfs for its cow magic.
OTOH, it is doable utilizing the alternate persistence method that I just
alluded to in the reply to JvM I just sent. The downside, is that unlike using
dm-snapshot overlay for persistence, implementing what you described would
require more user involvement. I.e. if you go create a file in your homedir,
then yank the plug on the computer, you would lose the file. Unlike with
dm-snapshot-overlay-persistence, in which the file would be there.
Admittedly, I've only given in 2-5 minutes of real thought, but I can't yet
think of any way to provide that fine grain level of control with
dm-snapshot-overlay as the persistence mechanism.
Though honestly I'm the sort of person that would say "hey, lets invite unionfs
back to the party for even more options" :) (though not for fedora8
timeframe... I'm not that crazy ;)
peace...
-dmc
>
> Maybe looking like this ... using a psuedo syntax that just hit me:
>
> [persistant paths]
> /home/user(rw)
> /etc(r)
>
> [persistant packages]
> *
>
> [persistant options]
>
>
> I guess the config would have to exist as say /etc/persistance.conf and be
> part of the persistant archive. Then joe user could go in, and change the
> /etc entry to (rw), reboot and then update a config file and then lock it
> down again and reboot.
>
> FWIW, this is somewhat similar to something I hacked together for a
> customized Knoppix disk.
>
> Timf Wood
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:25:56 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen
> <kanarip at kanarip.com> wrote:
>> Douglas McClendon wrote:
>>> Your preferred use case is certainly as valid or even moreso than the
>>> one I presented. But having both options seems ideal. Also, there may
>>> be an issue with usbflash data, and that in some instances it might be
>>> better to have it be mostly preburned as squashfs, rather than treated
>>> as a normal ext3fs. I.e. the whole jffs2 thing.
>>>
>> Well, I'm not against anything here, I'm sorry if it looked that way. It
>> just doesn't look like it's worth the effort to me personally.
>>
>>> Personally I rather like the idea of having my personal core system on
>>> read-only media, with just my homedir on flash.
>>>
>> Right, that makes sense. A home directory from flash would be nice, but
>> it wouldn't be really 'system persistence' would it? yum install foo and
>> yum remove bar will not have foo and will have bar after a reboot, right?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jeroen van Meeuwen
>> -kanarip
>>
>> --
>> Fedora-livecd-list mailing list
>> Fedora-livecd-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
More information about the livecd
mailing list