From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 6 12:41:45 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95099722 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 12:41:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions@m.gmane.org) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EEA7E5B for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 12:41:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TrpY5-0004Dy-RW for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2013 13:41:57 +0100 Received: from pool-173-79-84-117.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([173.79.84.117]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2013 13:41:57 +0100 Received: from nightrecon by pool-173-79-84-117.washdc.fios.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2013 13:41:57 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: Michael Powell Subject: Re: FB 9.1 boot loader problem in VirtualBox Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 07:41:26 -0500 Lines: 35 Message-ID: References: <50E96474.4060609@FreeBSD.org> <50E96D6E.5050106@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-173-79-84-117.washdc.fios.verizon.net X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nightrecon@hotmail.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 12:41:45 -0000 Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 06/01/2013 12:09, jb wrote: >> A general question: to what extent is FB Install aware of installation >> env (VB here) ? >> If so, would it make sense to sanitize it to avoid offering install >> options that are irrelevant/inappropriate ? > > This is FreeBSD. It doesn't hold your hand and wipe the drool off your > chin. You're assumed to know what you're doing, and to be able to > configure your systems appropriately. And when you do know, and can > configure things, then it doesn't get in your way. > > The installer doesn't know about all the various possible different > execution environments it might get used in. To do so would add a lot > of complexity for not very much gain to most users. Instead, it is > targeted at the most common installation scenario: direct installation > onto a PC with all the standard sort of capabilities. This should > produce a working system for the vast majority of use cases, but you may > need to go in and twiddle a few knobs and generally tune things up a bit > to get the very best results. > The converse may be applicable as well, that Vbox has configurability to know a little something about the environment for the proposed guest. When creating a new VM, you can choose BSD in the Operating System drop-down and then choose FreeBSD or FreebSD-64. I've had no trouble installing the 9.1 Release disk1 CD into a Vbox VM (amd64 version). What I have not done is tried all the various partitioning schemes available under "Manual" config. Possibly one, such as Dos MBR or BSD disklabel which I have not tried, may be broken boot-loading wise. I only went straight down the GPT road. -Mike