From owner-freebsd-sysinstall@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 30 05:39:15 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sysinstall@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 298A4A99; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 05:39:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.e.sanliturk@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vc0-x22a.google.com (mail-vc0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB39C25D1; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 05:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id kw10so994489vcb.15 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 22:39:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VicF7PNIkVivpL3yq6kP7loPzZa4vnFs8U5u99NutZI=; b=kLW20Cy/9BCD/stp4aSIfJLZZCLWK/JgIZoJ3i+q9mDs9kgzf0+k9RhkFYJaCgVBQT nifassVlsFnxnt0wr32/BJMoUoYNn/hifePp3bKWvbPUwVDPmhgFG4Hch7nM4Z4Lk7Gv b+gnzkxOA874QyHlMd+v7KGptkH2JxzUQTnEUqlQbxdqxJ8zGq2Z/+J6nfn5/Itgk70s CjaloAL75ihq74dzf23Hwa4VMoe12WEYPH/xPkOccSdUgX6FLR7y3V+ks7RLORTUHcyd 15D/3hyQTTEq4xt1c53ySIZ7kqzw7kpFFhBCSEOJgYsovpR67ALltIDjvcFSVdRL+l6m t2kQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.171.38 with SMTP id ar6mr4842005vdc.22.1377841153887; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 22:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.118.104 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 22:39:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <52200CEB.9030101@freebsd.org> References: <521FBC34.4070604@freebsd.org> <52200CEB.9030101@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 01:39:13 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Bug in bsdinstall (fs found where not present) From: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk To: Nathan Whitehorn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: freebsd-sysinstall@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-sysinstall@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Sysinstall Work List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 05:39:15 -0000 On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > On 08/29/13 17:02, Warren Block wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2013, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > > > >> On 08/29/13 14:04, Warren Block wrote: > >>>> From a 9.2-PRERELEASE snapshot, go into the shell, create a GPT disk > >>> layout with a bunch of partitions for filesystems and swap. Exit the > >>> shell and run the installer. > >>> > >>> Go through each partition setting a mount point. Tell bsdinstall to > >>> continue. It reports that the / partition has a preexisting > >>> filesystem (it does not, in fact; this disk had a mishmash of MBR and > >>> NTFS on it). > >>> > >>> Tell bsdinstall to continue anyway. It does, and then reports that it > >>> can't mount /dev/ada0p2 on /mnt, presumably because, contrary to the > >>> misleading and incorrect error message, there is no filesystem on > >>> there. > >>> > >>> The install fails, try again, entering all the mount points, and it > >>> will fail the same. > >>> > >>> Short term solution: newfs the / partition, so there really is a > >>> filesystem there for bsdinstall to detect and warn about. Then it > >>> works. > >> > >> bsdinstall has no way to detect whether or not you already have UFS in a > >> freebsd-ufs file system. It assumes, when not given contrary > >> information, that a partition that exists is initialized. There does not > >> seem to be a way around this. If you have any ideas, those would of > >> course be helpful. > > > > file(1) works well for detecting filesystems. > > > > For that matter, what is bsdinstall doing now that makes it say there > > is a filesystem on a partition? Maybe the message is misleading. > > What that actually means is that the partition exists. (file doesn't > work on block devices, by the way) I'm happy to change the error > message. The default behavior is that, like partitioners on all other > operating systems, it treats creating partitions and running newfs as > intimately linked activities -- similarly, that the type marked in the > partition table is the actual filesystem type. Intermediate cases are > very hard to detect reliably. > -Nathan > _______________________________________________ > > I am installing many different operating systems . One of the important problems is when "Use entire disk" is selected , some of the installers are still searching valid partitions on disk and failing miserably because there does not exist any one ( because unit is new or corrupted ) or there are some partitions , etc. remained from another different operating system . My opinion is that the first question should be to select an option among "Use entire disk" or "Use existing file systems" . alternatives , only search valid file system(s) when "Use existing file systems" is selected . When "Use entire disk" is selected , directly apply file systems creations by just after determining the geometry of the unit under consideration . Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk