From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 22 07:24:24 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 E0E0C16A4CE for ; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:24:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.198.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B4C43FB1 for ; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:24:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from be-well.no-ip.com ([66.30.200.37]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2003112215242301300ip1pde>; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:24:23 +0000 Received: by be-well.no-ip.com (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 772AB56; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:24:23 -0500 (EST) Sender: lowell@be-well.ilk.org To: sad@mailaps.org References: <20031122103852.E3319@tiscali.de> From: Lowell Gilbert Date: 22 Nov 2003 10:24:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20031122103852.E3319@tiscali.de> Message-ID: <444qwwe89k.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Lines: 20 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FBSD 5.1 and 4.8 sharing the same /home (and /var) possible? 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: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:24:25 -0000 "Stefan A. Deutscher" writes: > (a) Is it OK to have the slices to be shared on ufs2, or will 4.8R > wreck havoc when accessing those (or, better: just not be able to > see them) 4.x won't understand UFS2. > (b) If ufs2 is not OK for use on both systems, are there any things to > consider when making them ufs1? I suppose I would have to backup, > newfs -O1, and restore the /var slice on da1, or is it advisable to > just make /var/mail a symlink to some separate ufs1 /mail slice? You need UFS1 to share it between FreeBSD versions, but whether it's worth re-creating the partition for that is up to you. > (c) Will the background file system checks introduced with 5.x still > work on these ufs1 slices? They should.