| > You've been assuming a crap load of stuff as well when it suits your argument. Like having a pre-prepared USB key to begin with. You are still conveniently ignoring what I said: if you want to install system with ZFS root, you have to make it. That's also the reason why I have it. I just didn't throw it away after the installation. > Except the whole point of this tangent is me demonstrating where it does work. Yes, if everything is aligned right, it can work. > I seriously just think you're now just arguing for the sake of winning an internet argument. You are free to think whatever you want. > you can use live CDs to repair a degraded system running ZFS. Yes, under certain conditions. How they apply in your environment is up to you to assess. > Sure there will be occasions when you cannot; but that's the case when doing anything in IT (and thus why use sysadmins get to command such a good wage). But generally you can. And I literally have. Many times in fact. So enough with the dumb "death by a thousand paper cuts" and goal post moving arguments please. It's not goal post moving, it's what happens. Having a livecd that supports your configuration is advantageous to not having it. Being able to download a ready-mady one is advantageous to having to make it. Etc. So when I can choose between freebsd or opensolaris iso and native system that fully support whatever I need (that was the original issue, remember?), of course I will choose the latter, or having the latter available is preferred. |
I'm not ignoring it; I've repeatedly addressed it and pointed out how it's not true (the Ubuntu Desktop example). Want a few more examples? When I installed ArchLinux with a ZFS root I didn't use a custom ISO (read their ZFS wiki if you don't believe me). I also didn't create a custom Ubuntu Server ISO when I installed that with a ZFS root. Both were installed from CD - the vanilla CD available on their respective websites.
Also, even if you did install from a USB key; what's to say you don't then lose said key afterwards? I'm forever am losing them.
The point is whichever argument you're going to make will be full of more exceptions than you can count. So nitpicking one over the other, like you are, is an utterly pointless exercise and a distraction from the original point I was making.
> So when I can choose between freebsd or opensolaris iso and native system that fully support whatever I need (that was the original issue, remember?)
No that wasn't the original issue. The original issue was whether there are an live CDs that can be used to rescue a degraded ZFS system - which I've demonstrated there are.
However I do agree with you that running ZFS on Linux is a little pointless when FreeBSD and the OpenSolaris forks are all solid platforms and have unencumbered native ZFS support. Though installing a ZFS root on FreeBSD was just as painful as doing so on ArchLinux (at least that was the case a few versions ago - things might have improved since but thankfully FreeBSD never really needs rebuilds so I've not had revisit that particular pain point)