From owner-freebsd-current Mon Dec 10 0:57:20 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from monorchid.lemis.com (monorchid.lemis.com [192.109.197.75]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51E137B416; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:57:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by monorchid.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 6FEC6786E6; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:27:09 +1030 (CST) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:27:09 +1030 From: Greg Lehey To: Mike Smith Cc: Joerg Wunsch , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: "Dangerously Decidated" yet again (was : cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c) Message-ID: <20011210192709.H63585@monorchid.lemis.com> References: <20011210130713.C63585@monorchid.lemis.com> <200112100817.fBA8HEe07837@mass.dis.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200112100817.fBA8HEe07837@mass.dis.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i Organization: The FreeBSD Project Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 0:17:14 -0800, Mike Smith wrote: >>>>> Still, it's my opinion that these BIOSes are simply broken: >>> >>> Joerg's personal opinion can go take a hike. The reality of the >>> situation is that this table is required, and we're going to put it there. >> >> The reality of the situation is far from being clear. The only thing >> I can see is that you're trying to dictate things without adequate >> justification. You should reconsider that attitude. > > You can't substantiate your argument by closing your eyes, Greg. No, of course not. I also can't substantiate my arguments by sticking my fingers down my throat and shouting "dangerously dedicated!". But then, I wasn't doing either. Read back this thread for the evidence I have given and which you apparently choose to ignore. > There's a wealth of evidence against your stance, Possibly, you just haven't shown it. What we know so far is that there are some kludges in the boot loader which can confuse BIOSes; peter went into some detail earlier on IRC. Only, they apply both to systems with Microsoft partitions and those without. And there are reports that some Adaptec host adaptors (or, presumably, their BIOSes) can't handle our particular boot blocks. It's possible, as peter suggests, that this is a fixable bug, but every time I mention it, I get shouted down. And yes, like Jörg, I don't care enough. I'm not saying "ditch the Microsoft partition table", I'm saying "don't ditch disks without the Microsoft partition table". Note also that, although this is so "dangerous", it has never bitten me on any system. > and frankly, none that supports it other than myopic bigotry ("I > don't want to do this because Microsoft use this format"). None that you care to remember. > Are you going to stop using all of the other techniques that we > share with them? No. See above. What is it about this particular topic brings out such irrational emotions in you and others? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message