From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 4 07:48:48 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id HAA13757 for current-outgoing; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 07:48:48 -0700 Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id HAA13751 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 07:48:37 -0700 Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id AAA24580; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 00:45:57 +1000 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 00:45:57 +1000 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199504041445.AAA24580@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, bob@obiwan.pmr.com Subject: Re: Proper procedure to partition/label disk now? Cc: freebsd-current@freefall.cdrom.com Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> For using the whole disk for FreeBSD, just run disklabel. The man >> page may actually be complete now that the 'd' partition isn't >> special. This assumes that the disk really is clean, without >> misleading junk in the partition table. >Ok, I've done that. When I mount the filesystem (after having >newfs'd it) I get the following messages: >Apr 4 08:14:27 luke /kernel: sd2: invalid primary partition table: no magic >Apr 4 08:14:27 luke /kernel: sd2: raw partition size != slice size >Apr 4 08:14:27 luke /kernel: sd2: start 0, end 782599, size 782600 >Apr 4 08:14:27 luke /kernel: sd2c: start 0, end 782335, size 782336 These messages are only warnings. Should they be removed? The first one says that there is apparently no partition table. `disklabel -B' would write a suitable partition table. The message should never be printed for bootable disks. The last 3 say that you made the raw partition size smaller than the disk size. This is a strange thing to do because the raw partition is supposed to cover the whole disk. There is no reason to round it to a cylinder boundary. >Here is the disklabel for the drive: ># /dev/rsd2c: >... >sectors/unit: 782600 >... >4 partitions: ># size offset fstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg] > a: 782336 0 4.2BSD 1024 8192 16 # (Cyl. 0 - 381) > c: 782336 0 unused 0 0 # (Cyl. 0 - 381) > d: 782336 0 unused 0 0 # (Cyl. 0 - 381) The sectors/unit value isn't rounded. Good. Perhaps it should be checked instead of the 'c' partition size. No, I just remembered why not. Old labels have to be converted, and the sectors/unit value is guaranteed to be wrong (being for the whole disk ond not for the BSD slice) except when there is only one slice, so the 'c' partition size has to be trusted. The 'd' partition shouldn't be necessary. Bruce