Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:18:09 -0700 From: Juli Mallett <juli@clockworksquid.com> To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Is anything being done to un-break partition names? Message-ID: <eaa228be0906041618k6e6db227m9627946f3e0d4980@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hey folks, If I install 7.2 (or old 8-CURRENT) and partition a drive "dangerously dedicated" and answer No when asked if I want to create a true partition entry, and then install as normal, my system is set up with partitions named like da0s1a. Newer 8-CURRENT instead names the devices da0a, which means root mount fails, etc., until one updates /etc/fstab. This also seems to confuse sysinstall, which appears to expect labeling da0s1 to work even if you're in dangerously-dedicated mode =97 though I might be misunderstanding the interactions there; randi@ suggests it's just a problem with sanitizing disk names in libdisk, although when I built sysinstall with a patched libdisk and tried to use it when booting from an 8-CURRENT (snapshot as of a few weeks back) livefs disk, it seemed to have other problems with the device names. This seems like a huge POLA violation and has eaten several hours of my life in terms of fixing servers that were tracking 8-CURRENT and failed to boot up because of the need to change /etc/fstab that wasn't documented in UPDATING. Is anything being done to add compatibility slice names, or to teach mergemaster about the change? I don't know enough about what all is going on on disk to know whether this is something that just affects dangerously-dedicated disks, but it seems to be consistently biting me, and I can only imagine how much trouble it's going to cause others. Was this change even intentional? Juli.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?eaa228be0906041618k6e6db227m9627946f3e0d4980>