Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:49:35 +0100 (BST) From: Chris Hedley <cbh@chrishedley.com> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Possible bug in sbin/bsdlabel.c in -CURRENT Message-ID: <20040920234231.F1009@teapot.cbhnet> In-Reply-To: <20040920174106.GB21687@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <20040919225036.B1582@teapot.cbhnet> <20040920174106.GB21687@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Brooks Davis wrote: > IIRC you can't extend the number of partitions unless you don't need > boot blocks so this isn't all that useful except in situtations where > gpt(8) is a much better solution. Fixing this hardcoding seems like a > reasionable idea, but I'm not an expert on this subject. We're trying > to avoid stopgap hack to bsdlabel in general because it's an obviously > dead-end solution and we want to move on to something like GPT as soon > as feasiable. I see what you mean; I neglected to reboot before saying "it doesn't cause any problems" and it does indeed cause the minor problem of killing boot2 (just how many mistakes can I fit into one email? Perhaps I shouldn't post so late at night :) Er, anyway, since I'm now reduced to booting off an installation floppy I'll revise my claim to echo your comment that it's great as long as you don't ever need to boot. I suppose I should change it back to an 8 partition label and wait for gpt to mature unless there's a fix that doesn't cause big partition tables to interfere with the boot process (maybe I should have a look at how NetBSD does it...) Chris.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040920234231.F1009>