From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 29 15:27:30 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08E581065696 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:27:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@withagen.nl) Received: from mail.digiware.nl (mail.digiware.nl [80.255.245.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBE838FC15 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:27:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@withagen.nl) Received: from localhost (localhost.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) by mail.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A6A8153434; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:27:28 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at digiware.nl Received: from mail.digiware.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rack1.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EW-3qLOIJ34v; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:27:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.254.10] (unknown [192.168.254.10]) by mail.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1D6153433; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:27:25 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A48DD61.6070104@withagen.nl> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:27:29 +0200 From: Willem Jan Withagen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Aisaka Taiga References: <4A476C7C.3020605@withagen.nl> <4A477576.6030701@haruhiism.net> <4A4779AF.1020303@digiware.nl> <4A487AEA.7040906@haruhiism.net> In-Reply-To: <4A487AEA.7040906@haruhiism.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 7.2-stable upgrade changes disknames X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:27:30 -0000 Aisaka Taiga wrote: > Willem Jan Withagen wrote: >> On 7.2 this used to work(tm), on 8.0 boot start complaining. >> So somewhere a (unwanted) flexibility got deleted >> And I have to manually fix my /etc/fstab to what is factual correct. >> And that was what my message was about: >> It can/will(??) bite a lot more users. >> With similar remarks and/or questions. > To be honest, I'm quite amused that it actually worked for you, because > if you use a dangerously dedicated disk you, basically, don't need a > partition table at all as the slice 'table' (bsdlabel) takes care of > everything. And if there's no partition table, there can be no adXs1a > boot device - even in 7.2. > If you got your fstab from sysinstall, I don't really know how did you > manage to migrate to a DDD without modifying fstab, because sysinstall > has no clue about the existence of DDDs. To get a system running on a > DDD you would basically need to install BTX (using fdisk), label the > drive with bsdlabel, and then dump/restore or tar c | tar x the > filesystems. > But according to you, until -CURRENT you had a working partition table > (hence adXs1a working). And make installworld should never bother with > partition tables. > (This is really weird.) Although I'm know to always choose the options that will trigger edge cases. This was a fast en no-brainer install, hence a DDD install. So now the question boils down to: how many people did install DDD and were abusing the feature that it also mimiced a sliced disk?? Those are the users that are going to run into a non-booting upgrade. So how many users use a DDD install? And the second question: Does this warrant at least a notification in the UPGRADING file? From dimitry's answer I understand that it really used to function as a I described, and that it was more incidental that things worked the way sysinstall left them after booting. --WjW