From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Dec  3 03:50:12 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id DAA02161
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 03:50:12 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA02156
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 03:50:07 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from julian@whistle.com)
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA09662
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 03:46:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from UNKNOWN(), claiming to be "current1.whistle.com"
 via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpd009658; Wed Dec  3 03:46:00 1997
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 03:43:39 -0800 (PST)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
To: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: a quick slice/devfs patch
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.971203033944.13142B-100000@current1.whistle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


This patch will be needed to handle newer "dangerously dedicated"
systems. Some of you have noticed that that didn't work right.

The patch MIGHT not apply cleanly on what is out there
but hey it's a 4 liner.. I'm sur eyou get the drift :)

*** mbr.c.old	Wed Dec  3 03:31:02 1997
--- mbr.c	Wed Dec  3 03:28:50 1997
***************
*** 176,181 ****
--- 176,185 ----
  			printf ("rejected.. bad flag\n");
  			return(EINVAL);	/* must be either 0 or 0x80 */
  		}
+ 		if ((dp->dp_type) && (dp->dp_size) && (dp->dp_start == 0)) {
+ 			printf("rejected.. Slice includes MBR\n");
+ 			return (EINVAL);
+ 		}
  		if (dp->dp_flag == 0x80)
  			numactive++;
  	}


   ......