Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 09:01:22 +0200 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Paul Mather <paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> Cc: Chris Elsworth <chris@shagged.org> Subject: Re: WARNING: Expected rawoffset 0, found 63 ? Message-ID: <63060.1096095682@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:10:36 EDT." <1096063835.9306.130.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <1096063835.9306.130.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org>, Paul Mather writes : >On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 17:50, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> In message <1096056348.9306.87.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org>, Paul Mather writes: > >> >I believe the above is bsdlabel's idea of an "auto" label. I don't know >> >why the 16 sector offset for the "a" partition, because you don't get >> >that when you label a slice via sysinstall and choose the "auto >> >defaults." (Maybe there's a case for making bsdlabel's "auto" label >> >behave the same as sysinstall.) >> >> The 16 offset is to protect the disklabel and boot code. You have no >> idea how much I hate the person who made the hack to leave the metadata >> inside the trafic partitions. > >So I guess the case to be made is really to have sysinstall behave the >same as bsdlabel, not vice versa. yes. >I'm presuming sysinstall-style partition-a-starts-at-offset-0 labels are >still safe, though, right? As "safe" as they always were, which means "not very". They have a tendency to blow up on people if they try to change them. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?63060.1096095682>