From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Aug 27 17:02:11 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4114663AF9 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 17:02:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ralf-mardorf@riseup.net) Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Gx5c24PQyz3FKP for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 17:02:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ralf-mardorf@riseup.net) Received: from fews2.riseup.net (fews2-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.84]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Gx5c13Dv9zDrc1 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1630083729; bh=lZ2BaiYgserwr1TBb+Ks+LGgGyJKoVfs0a/bIwwcGtM=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=GCkMaVkxpStuImbOoxfWpQf83+Vf0zrNdL1Ja9Vosy+QzTp3QQeatKrhACgUjgRVF rLBrZumymaav9K82EnK1Xon+iT5SxrUHtjC8P0ft7PDjXnS+pY63Un4GpoEqGqQQbs 67+QT0vnKXR0yG/70PDoxxc7nqAhs4Kjs4GbggWw= X-Riseup-User-ID: 50B31AAEB81EF0EBE0CD116408014429B2C55880F2267B721D5A885385719267 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews2.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Gx5c065BLz1ySf for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 10:02:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:02:08 +0200 From: Ralf Mardorf To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Paritioning scheme on MBR disk doubts Message-ID: <20210827190208.4280496c@archlinux> In-Reply-To: References: <20210826203921.0d3537684706867aef1e30f9@sohara.org> <20210827071306.34e90c17@archlinux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Gx5c24PQyz3FKP X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=GCkMaVkx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ralf-mardorf@riseup.net designates 198.252.153.129 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ralf-mardorf@riseup.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.60 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[riseup.net:s=squak]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[198.252.153.129:from]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[riseup.net:dkim]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[riseup.net:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[riseup.net,none]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16652, ipnet:198.252.153.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-questions]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[198.252.153.129:from] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 17:02:11 -0000 On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 16:02:35 +0200, Javier wrote: >Anyway, all this makes me ask now... does FreeBSD have any kind of >limitation I could suffer in the way the MBR implementation is >setup/programmed? I'm not aware of limitation you need to worry about in real world scenarios, other than... (I'm mainly a Linux multi-boot user. I migrated from GRUB legacy to GRUB 2 to syslinux. However, in the past I also chainloaded FreeBSD. All my old internal HDDs were, as well as my new internal SSDs and external HDDs are <= 2 TiB MBR drives only.) ...the other day I read something scary. It's not related to an operating system, bootloader or partitioning tool. It's a hardware issue. Some mobo vendors have dropped legacy BIOS support, thus they dropped booting an operating system from MBR formatted devices. It's required to migrate from MBR to GPT for those drives, if there is the need to replace a mobo, by another one that doesn't provide a legacy BIOS option. IIRC the related Unified Extensible Firmware Interface term for booting MBR partitions is "CSM support".