Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 16:04:49 -0500 From: "illoai@gmail.com" <illoai@gmail.com> To: "Marc G. Fournier" <freebsd@hub.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is 'disklabel'ng a new drive so difficult? Message-ID: <d7195cff0703281404j48d34d14w12d4d39d90434875@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <C0012B02FE5D8BE2EC25FE05@ganymede.hub.org> References: <C0012B02FE5D8BE2EC25FE05@ganymede.hub.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 28/03/07, Marc G. Fournier <freebsd@hub.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Just bought a new WD SATA drive: WDC WD5000YS-01MPB1 09.02E09 > > Tried to disklabel it, and it gives me all kinds of warnings when I look at it > after running the disklabel: > > > ganymede# bsdlabel -w ad4s1 auto > ganymede# bsdlabel ad4s1c > # /dev/ad4s1c: > 8 partitions: > # size offset fstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg] > a: 976767986 79 unused 0 0 > c: 976768002 63 unused 0 0 # "raw" part, don't > edit > partition a: partition extends past end of unit > partition c: partition extends past end of unit > bsdlabel: partition c doesn't start at 0! > bsdlabel: An incorrect partition c may cause problems for standard system > utilities > > Even if I try to use /stand/sysinstall to do the fdisk, the end result has > 'issues' ... > > So, what is the generally accepted method of label'ng a new drive? :( I think you have it correct (or "right" as they say). When I: % bsdlabel [da|ad]NsNc those very error messages are horked up on _some_ drives. To me % bsdlabel [da|ad]NsN has always been the correct method. The drives which DO return the errors have partitions newfs-ed with a non-default blocksize (-b 8192). What effect (or "impact" if you learnt English in a Zeppelin over Italy in 1916) that may have is beyond me. -- --
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d7195cff0703281404j48d34d14w12d4d39d90434875>