From owner-freebsd-questions  Mon Sep 11  1: 8:52 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from relay2.inwind.it (relay2.inwind.it [212.141.53.73])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA59837B423
	for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 01:08:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bartequi.ottodomain.org (212.141.78.212) by relay2.inwind.it (5.1.046)
        id 39AF9CE3000D6280; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:08:04 +0200
From: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@inwind.it>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:08:18 GMT
Message-ID: <20000911.9081800@bartequi.ottodomain.org>
Subject: Re: drive layout
To: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?P=E4r?= Thoren <t98pth@student.hk-r.se>,
	freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <14779.50412.25390.255657@guru.mired.org>
References: <14779.50412.25390.255657@guru.mired.org>
X-Mailer: SuperCalifragilis
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

[not quite sure whether to send this to -questions or -chat]


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 9/10/00, 6:29:16 PM, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> wrote regarding Re:=20
drive layout:


> Salvo Bartolotta writes:
> > AdNsi is, IIRC, an old (compatibility) scheme. I am not quite sure h=
ow
> > it works when you have more than one slice on the same disk (e.g.
> > ad0s1a, ad0s1e, ad0s1f; ad0s2a, ad0s2e, ad0s2f ...); on the other
> > hand, I use the ordinary label(l)ing in my /etc/fstab.

> Is that a typo? Do you really mean "adNi"? (i.e. - ad0a, ad1c, etc?).
> If so, that was the original BSD naming scheme, and is probably still
> used on systems with disks that don't have slices. In particular, it
> was used for dangerously dedicated disks on FreeBSD at one
> point. Those disks don't have more than one slice.

> These days, the name adNx and adNs1x are identical (i.e. - I get the
> same file systems for them on either a DD or a sliced disk on
> -current). However, I continue using the adNx names for dangerously
> dedicated disks. Not only does it make logical sense, it is then
> obvious that they *are* DD, so you don't try tweaking the slice table.=


>       <mike



You are quite right, it is a typo. Thanks for pointing it out, and for=20
highlighting the topic.

By the way, I wrote about the "compatibility" scheme as I recalled=20
reading other posts to that effect. The term "compatibility" is=20
probably not the best one to appropriately describe the situation.=20

When installing OpenBSD 2.7 on my multiboot multidisk (multisliced)=20
'puter -- YAOS(tm) (Yet Another Operating System) -- I had run into=20
the same scheme, mutatis mutandis: wdNx.

N.B. In my workstation, OpenBSD lives in two slices on two different=20
disks; in FreeBSD parlance, the slices are ad1s2 (/, swap /var) and=20
ad2s2 (/usr); but OpenBSD utilizes the wdNx scheme all the same.=20
Things seem to work as expected -- so far. Incidentally, since I chose=20
a local diskIinstallation, I seamlessly accessed even the FreeBSD=20
partitions via that scheme.

Best regards,
Salvo





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message