From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 13 15:36:06 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37FC0C7A for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:36:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE793A41 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:36:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r0DFa38Z015988; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 08:36:03 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) with ESMTP id r0DFa3hH015985; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 08:36:03 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 08:36:03 -0700 (MST) From: Warren Block To: kpneal@pobox.com Subject: Re: gpart, glabel and newfs --> what am I doing wrong In-Reply-To: <20130113063621.GB63271@neutralgood.org> Message-ID: References: <20130112192220.617e28b6@X220.ovitrap.com> <20130113080900.1a0045f8@X220.ovitrap.com> <20130113063621.GB63271@neutralgood.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Sun, 13 Jan 2013 08:36:03 -0700 (MST) Cc: Erich Dollansky , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:36:06 -0000 On Sun, 13 Jan 2013, kpneal@pobox.com wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 08:09:00AM +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote: >> For what is glabel then still good? > > It is still useful for partition schemes that don't have labels (eg, MBR) > AND the filesystem used doesn't support labels itself AND the end of the > partition does not get touched by the filesystem. But it doesn't matter what the filesystem does. Access to the last block is not allowed by the label device. The filesystem does not even see it. See my reply in -fs: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2013-January/016113.html