From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 26 14:00:58 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD07D1065674 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:00:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B627E8FC0C for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:00:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6EE4446B46; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:00:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F1608A037; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:00:58 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:27:02 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-CBSD-20110617; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <201109260053.SAA25795@lariat.net> In-Reply-To: <201109260053.SAA25795@lariat.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201109260927.02540.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:00:58 -0400 (EDT) Cc: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Experiences with FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:00:59 -0000 On Sunday, September 25, 2011 8:52:37 pm Brett Glass wrote: > First thing I noticed, when running the new FreeBSD installer from > a memory stick image, is that disk partitioning was odd. It > abandoned standard UNIX parlance, calling what are traditionally > called "slices" partitions. It also diverged from past practice by > creating one big UFS filesystem rather than the usual separate > partitions for /, /tmp, /var, /usr. It then made a separate slice > (to use the traditional terminology) for swap, rather than > including it in the slice that contained the big file system. This > seemed odd; if the file system was being lumped together in one > place, why break out the swap to an entirely separate slice? I can't speak to the "one-big-fs" bit (there was another thread long ago about that). However, as to the partitioning bit, bsdinstall is defaulting to using the newer GPT scheme instead of an MBR with a nested BSD label. It is simpler (only LBAs, no C/H/S dance), more extensible (partition table can be sized at creation time), supports larger disks (64-bit LBAs, which neither MBR nor the BSD label support), and is the x86 disk layout scheme of the future (EFI mandates GPT). It is actually more like a traditional BSD system that would have only had a BSD label (and no MBR) on the disk. -- John Baldwin