e that the discussion ended in nothing at the time.
I believe that two different behaviors should not be described by one value.

In fact, I recently encountered some strange behavior of the disk subsystem.
Background.
There are two M.2 slots on the motherboard, one of them was NVMe with a sys=
tem
(GPT+ZFS).
It was installed =E2=80=9Cfull automatic=E2=80=9D.
Needed to clear NVMe 4Tb and partitioned to create another FreeBSD.
The 4Tb previously had GPT partitioning and three partitions: efi, system,
home.
History.
After installing on Mb they were seen as nvd0p1, nvd0p2, nvd0p3
And the working system was on nvd1.
I had no way to repartition this 4Tb disk.
Until I _physically_ swapped these NVMe disks to Mb.
Booted by the label from the correct disk, and when mounting it.
partition nvd0p3 was attached (there was nothing there, only zeros),
and the normal nvd1p3 was mounted on top of it.
And I couldn't do anything with nvd0 because it was busy.
It turned out that Mb thought that the first slot was the slot farther away
from the processor.
And when there was no disk in number 1, the second one was considered first.
These are all peculiarities of Mb. However, it was the fact that at boot up,
there was a mess of confusion
with how the partitions were mounted was because the different modes
modes are described by one value.

P.S. IMHO. Finding and mounting partitions should be clearly deterministic.
     If it is written that it is monitored by label -- mount by label.
     Or by partition type/name in the sense of physical device numbering.
     And it should be possible to specify how to perceive different partiti=
ons.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=