From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Apr 22 17:43:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA21034 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 17:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA20992 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 17:42:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rover.village.org [127.0.0.1] by rover.village.org with esmtp (Exim 1.60 #1) id 0wJq4U-0000Aw-00; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 18:38:06 -0600 To: Terry Lambert Subject: Re: disklabel -- owner? Cc: jbryant@tfs.net, bakul@torrentnet.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 21 Apr 1997 09:55:21 PDT." <199704211655.JAA13746@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199704211655.JAA13746@phaeton.artisoft.com> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 18:38:06 -0600 From: Warner Losh Message-Id: Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message <199704211655.JAA13746@phaeton.artisoft.com> Terry Lambert writes: : NetBSD has upped this to 16 (or was it OpenBSD). OpenBSD defintitely did it. I don't think that NetBSD has done anything about this. OpenBSD can grok, btw the old style disklabels that FreeBSD writes. Had I known this when I was hacking on OpenBSD/arc at the outset, I'd have saved myself a lot of grief about learning how to boot a machine diskless :-(. : Either way, it's possible to up the number... but is it desirable? Yes. I think so. Not enought to try to do the work, however. : how big the BSD partition is. So 'c' and 'd' are redundant (all : redundancy not related to fault tolerance should be eliminated). I think that 'd' is no longer used, on freeBSD, for this purpose. It doesn't show up at all in any of my disklabel edits that I've been doing lately. Warner