From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 2 18:05:49 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0560106566C; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 18:05:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerrymc@gizmo.acns.msu.edu) Received: from gizmo.acns.msu.edu (gizmo.acns.msu.edu [35.8.1.43]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4911E8FC14; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 18:05:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gizmo.acns.msu.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gizmo.acns.msu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id nB2I2Vqc044150; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 13:02:31 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jerrymc@gizmo.acns.msu.edu) Received: (from jerrymc@localhost) by gizmo.acns.msu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id nB2I2VwA044149; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 13:02:31 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jerrymc) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 13:02:31 -0500 From: Jerry McAllister To: Randi Harper Message-ID: <20091202180231.GA44108@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> References: <1789c2360911280928t1e6e7b06p707abc1131f82bef@mail.gmail.com> <26ddd1750912010459weda306esbb81d7a2b7025b6e@mail.gmail.com> <20091201210321.GA39958@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <20091202152336.GA43517@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: Jerry McAllister , Maxim Khitrov , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Peggy Wilkins Subject: Re: 8.0-RELEASE and "dangerously dedicated" disks X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:05:49 -0000 On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 09:48:05AM -0800, Randi Harper wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > Some of the responses have said that UFS handling of 'Dangerously > > dedicated' has not gone away, just sysinstall handling of it. > > That may be true and if that is true, then you can probably still > > access dangerously dedicated drives.   But, I would think it is a > > good opportunity to convert them while the uncertainty reigns. > > Once again, it has nothing at all to do with UFS. Clearly you didn't > search the mailing list archives like I said you should. I removed the > support from sysinstall because it was *broken* due to changes with > geom. It is not a sysinstall thing, it's a "oh look, sysinstall lets > you do something that doesn't work anymore" thing. You'd think if the > person that made these changes to sysinstall was commenting on the > issue, that should clear up any uncertainty. But you can go ahead > believing whatever makes you happy. OK. If it is a geom thing, then its a geom thing. The statement that it might be a good time to convert dangerously dedicated disks to sliced and partitioned drives is still the point of the piece you quoted and still is valid. ALthough I have made a few DD disks in the past, I do not run with them and so don't really care other than someone was asking about it. Since I do not use DD disks, I am assuming this doesn't affect me. For someone else, the best thing to do is back up their stuff, rebuild the disk with the appropriate utilities (fdisk/bsdlabel/newfs or whatever works for you) and restore their stuff. ////jerry > > -- randi >