Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:01:59 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: phk@freebsd.org Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0301131301410.72092-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <73922.1042490221@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I agree with that too. On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 phk@freebsd.org wrote: > In message <Pine.BSF.4.21.0301131230310.72092-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>, Ju > lian Elischer writes: > > > >I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in > >disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use > >relative offsets. if the flag is not set then absolute offsets are > >expected.. That would give a way for us to move forward while still > >allowing partitions to co-exist with 4.x systems. > >in -current, geom just has to 'work with it' if the bit is not set. > >New systems would automatically set the bit. > > Better plan: Abandon BSD labels before disks outgrow them. > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0301131301410.72092-100000>