Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 08:32:17 -0500 (EST) From: John Capo <jc@irbs.com> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: freebsd-current@freefall.cdrom.com (freebsd-current) Subject: Re: Slice errors Message-ID: <199503271332.IAA06068@irbs.com> In-Reply-To: <199503270536.PAA08650@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Mar 27, 95 03:36:47 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce Evans writes: > > >> The data for partition 0 is: > >> <UNUSED> > >> The data for partition 1 is: > >> <UNUSED> > >> The data for partition 2 is: > >> <UNUSED> > >> The data for partition 3 is: > >> sysid 165,(FreeBSD/NetBSD/386BSD) > >> start 0, size 50000 (24 Meg), flag 80 > >> beg: cyl 0/ sector 1/ head 0; > >> end: cyl 1023/ sector 63/ head 255 > > >Use fdisk -u to correct the partition table so that size==size of > >your BSD c or d partition and things should be fine. What you see > >above is the bogus partition table that gets installed if you install > >new boot blocks. > > This advice no longer applies. The bogus partition table is specially > handled to make it work. Changing it risks introducing bugs and > changes will be blown away by new boot blocks. > > Bruce > Maybe that is why I only write new boot blocks when it absolutely necessary. The label was found and I was able to use the drive. I just wanted to get rid of the "raw partition size != slice size" message. I had to either increase the size of the c partition, which disklabel would not do for some reaseon, or reduce the slice size. Is there a reason that writing boot blocks can't re-write whatever partition table exixts? -- John Capo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199503271332.IAA06068>