Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 08:10:21 -0600 From: D J Hawkey Jr <hawkeyd@visi.com> To: David Wolfskill <david@catwhisker.org> Cc: questions at FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Two FBSD slices on one disk - losing mountpoints? Message-ID: <20020202081021.B10172@sheol.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <200202021356.g12DuHR55087@bunrab.catwhisker.org>; from david@catwhisker.org on Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 05:56:17AM -0800 References: <20020202072901.A9696@sheol.localdomain> <200202021356.g12DuHR55087@bunrab.catwhisker.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks to all for your help.
It's clear in my head now, and it's simpler than I originally thought
(as things often are!).
Dave
--
______________________ ______________________
\__________________ \ D. J. HAWKEY JR. / __________________/
\________________/\ hawkeyd@visi.com /\________________/
http://www.visi.com/~hawkeyd/
On Feb 02, at 05:56 AM, David Wolfskill wrote:
>
> >Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 07:29:01 -0600
> >From: D J Hawkey Jr <hawkeyd@visi.com>
>
> >The further I go, the behinder I get. I'm re-arranging your reply a
> >little here...
>
> :-)
>
> >> You cannot have two like-named partitions in a single OS instance.
>
> >But I can have two like-named partitions (we both mean "mountpoints" here)
> >across different slices?
>
> I think specifying an example of what you mean at this point might go a
> long way toward clarifying things, both for you and for your audience.
>
> >--------------
>
> >GAAAAA... gasp gasp...
>
> :-} Settle down; it's not that bad....
>
> >OK, let me re-cap, and then tell me where I'm wrong:
>
> >- Boot the 4.5-REL CD, and [re-]allocate a slice for the new install
> > in 'fdisk'. Leave all other slices as they are.
>
> OK.
>
> >- Move on to 'disklabel', and set up the new partitions in that new
> > slice. Whether 'disklabel' forces me to 'cuz I've allocated new
> > like-named mountpoints, or I pre-empt that limitation, re-name the
> > mountpoints of existing FBSD slice's partitions to something else.
> > Per a reply from David Wolfskill, mnemonics like "/S2", "/S2/usr"
> > for the second slice's mountpoints keeps things organised (**1).
>
> Note that when I'm booting a machine from (say) the "a" partition on
> slice 2, /S2 is an empty directory, and the "a" partition on slice 1 is
> accessible as /S1/ (by virtue of the /etc/fstab on ad0s2a).
>
> I *could* have made the "other slice" mount points arbitrarily bizarre,
> but that makes things complicated; simplicity is a Good Thing.
>
> >- Make certain the "Y" in the "newfs" column is set only in the new
> > slice's partitions (**2).
>
> Yes.
>
> >- Close my eyes and pray as I commit these changes.
>
> Before you commit, you might want to make yourself a diagram showing the
> different mount points and partitions.
>
> The critical thing is that whichever OS image you boot needs to have a
> consistent view of how things are laid out. You do not *need* to have
> the "other OS"'s file systems visible (at first), so you don't need to
> start with that level of complication. You can choose to mount them
> read-only, for example.
>
> >(**1) These mountpoint names are written to the new slice's /etc/fstab
> > only; in any other existing FBSD slice, I have to manually add
> > this new slice's partitions and mountpoints, as "/S1", etc., to
> > the existing slice's /etc/fstab.
>
> Right. (What I do in practice is a tad bit more complicated at first,
> but it makes the ongoing maintenance a bit easier. Let me know when you
> get that far, and we can go over it some more.)
>
> >(**2) This is the only thing that governs what slice and partition
> > 'sysinstall' deals with? Or do mountpoint names play a role, too?
>
> I *think* the former is correct. If I'm working with a running system,
> I just avoid using mount points that are already in use -- hence the
> /S2/... hierarchy.
>
> >Sorry to be so thick-headed and anal. I'm one of those people that need
> >to see the big picture in order to work on a little piece of it.
>
> :-)
>
> My "build machine" finished building today's -STABLE, so I did the
> portupgrade and the "cvs update" to the -CURRENT sources, and I just
> re-booted it under (yesterday's) -CURRENT. So, if you kept my last
> message, you may want to correlate that with this:
>
> freebeast(5.0-CUR)[1] df -k
> Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
> /dev/ad0s4a 158767 88278 57788 60% /
> devfs 1 1 0 100% /dev
> /dev/ad0s4e 1872759 634598 1088341 37% /usr
> /dev/ad0s4h 27728233 8021784 17488191 31% /common
> /dev/ad0s4g 2032839 407220 1462992 22% /var
> procfs 4 4 0 100% /proc
> /dev/md10c 492972 12 453524 0% /tmp
> freebeast(5.0-CUR)[2]
>
> (Recall that I have the /S1, /S2, & /S3 stuff in /etc/fstab as
> "noauto").
>
> Cheers,
> david (links to my resume at http://www.catwhisker.org/~david)
> --
> David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org
> I believe it would be irresponsible (and thus, unethical) for me to advise,
> recommend, or support the use of any product that is or depends on any
> Microsoft product for any purpose other than personal amusement.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020202081021.B10172>