From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 8 06:31:43 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32EF716A4CE for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 06:31:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nagual.pp.ru (pobrecita.freebsd.ru [194.87.13.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6044143D48 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 06:31:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ache@nagual.pp.ru) Received: from nagual.pp.ru (ache@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nagual.pp.ru (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j386VeIP007073; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:31:40 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from ache@nagual.pp.ru) Received: (from ache@localhost) by nagual.pp.ru (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j386VelN007072; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:31:40 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from ache) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:31:39 +0400 From: Andrey Chernov To: Marcel Moolenaar Message-ID: <20050408063138.GA6884@nagual.pp.ru> Mail-Followup-To: Andrey Chernov , Marcel Moolenaar , Poul-Henning Kamp , current@FreeBSD.ORG References: <21342.1112914675@critter.freebsd.dk> <09c6072206df99be25e345b7e13354f5@xcllnt.net> <20050408050405.GA5203@nagual.pp.ru> <19f3c4e12937f581f7420bc841a11810@xcllnt.net> <20050408055144.GA6147@nagual.pp.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter (version: 1.1.0-3; AVE: 6.30.0.7; VDF: 6.30.0.74; host: nagual.pp.ru) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (nagual.pp.ru [0.0.0.0]); Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:31:41 +0400 (MSD) cc: Poul-Henning Kamp cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GEOM architecture and the (lack of) need for foot-shooting X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 06:31:43 -0000 On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:18:17PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > >It bring some problems like illegal on-disk modification synced to > >in-core. > > Q: what would you consider illegal on-disk modifications? F.e. one can temporary remove whole BSD partition for other OS better install, then re-create it again inside other OS. > > Since on-disk editing is not controlled (and should not be), it > >may overlap or be incorrect in some other way. > > Q: why is on-disk editing not controlled and why shouldn't it be? There was a cases when filesystem is damaged, sectors goes off partition limits, etc. There must be temporary way to fix - to write bigger (overlap) partition, grab needed files, then restore correct one. It can be controlled minimally with warnings, but not with disalowing. > > But, if you edit in-core > >partition instead, as I suggest, you can do all sorts of checking and > >safety, easily excluding overlaps, etc. > > I can't say I buy into that. I don't see how in-core editing can be > better > checked than on-disk editing. Can you explain? In-core editing always suppose currently running correct partition table. It must not allow to add, say, overlaping partition entry. On-disk editing should allow to write incorrect partition table for temporary disk surgery purposes. -- http://ache.pp.ru/