Emmanuel Vadot

We probably should use the same name as the installer and iirc we don't use "efiboot0" there.

> I believe we're standardizing on efiboot0 everywhere. IIRC old versions of bsdinstall used efiboot, but when multi-esp support was added, it was added as efiboot%d starting at 0. Yes...

I guess it make sense but I've never really used bsdconfig. Also iirc bsdinstall depends on bsdconfig so maybe we need to add a dep in the bsdinstall package.

Oh also since this is a new package we need an entry in release/packages/Makefile.package

> unfortunately local testing turned up an issue with this which is that service(8) requires bsdconfig at least for enable/disable: > > ``` > # service uuidd enable > .:...

> > I can't see where service(8) needs bsdconfig > > in fact, it's not service(8) but rather sysrc(8) (which is called by service): > > ``` > BSDCFG_SHARE="/usr/share/bsdconfig" >...

Ideally sysrc(8) should also live in FreeBSD-rc

> yes, i think both sysrc(8) and service(8) should be in FreeBSD-rc as they only make sense in the context of the rc system. > > that means FreeBSD-rc should...

> > (or, does it make sense to simply put bsdconfig into the bsdinstall package?) > > yes, i think that might make sense No it doesn't.