From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 12 20:45:22 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06B037B401 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:45:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au [128.250.20.3]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4405743F93 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:45:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au) Received: from elkanah.its.unimelb.edu.au (elkanah.its.unimelb.edu.au [128.250.18.41])h5D3jJfE014463 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:45:19 +1000 (EST) From: JacobRhoden Organization: University of Melbourne To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:45:19 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200306131345.19437.jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au> Subject: 5.1-RELEASE with swap partion as first partion is bad X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 03:45:22 -0000 hi, I dont know if this has always been the case, but someone in our office (new to FreeBSD) was trying to install 5.1 with the swap partion first. He tried very hard for hours, but he couldnt get it to work (even after I told him try having the swap partion second instead). Is it documented that having the swap partion first is bad, or is it simply a bug (errata?). regards, jacob Jacob Rhoden Phone: +61 3 8344 6102 ITS Division Email: jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au Melbourne University Mobile: +61 403 788 386