Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:12:04 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> To: Juli Mallett <juli@clockworksquid.com> Cc: marcel@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is anything being done to un-break partition names? Message-ID: <20090605051203.GD1705@garage.freebsd.pl> In-Reply-To: <eaa228be0906041618k6e6db227m9627946f3e0d4980@mail.gmail.com> References: <eaa228be0906041618k6e6db227m9627946f3e0d4980@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--7CZp05NP8/gJM8Cl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:18:09PM -0700, Juli Mallett wrote: > Hey folks, >=20 > If I install 7.2 (or old 8-CURRENT) and partition a drive "dangerously > dedicated" and answer No when asked if I want to create a true > partition entry, and then install as normal, my system is set up with > partitions named like da0s1a. Newer 8-CURRENT instead names the > devices da0a, which means root mount fails, etc., until one updates > /etc/fstab. This also seems to confuse sysinstall, which appears to > expect labeling da0s1 to work even if you're in dangerously-dedicated > mode =E2=80=94 though I might be misunderstanding the interactions there; > randi@ suggests it's just a problem with sanitizing disk names in > libdisk, although when I built sysinstall with a patched libdisk and > tried to use it when booting from an 8-CURRENT (snapshot as of a few > weeks back) livefs disk, it seemed to have other problems with the > device names. >=20 > This seems like a huge POLA violation and has eaten several hours of > my life in terms of fixing servers that were tracking 8-CURRENT and > failed to boot up because of the need to change /etc/fstab that wasn't > documented in UPDATING. I was bitten by the exactly the same thing. Unfortunately in my case I was upgrading from 7.0 or something and kernel.old didn't work for me with new userland. So I had to compile GEOM_PART_MBR out and compiled GEOM_MBR in, everything on another machine and then transfer new kernel using nc(1) and tar(1), because sshd(8) didn't work properly. And I was in a hury. All in all, a huge disappointment. BTW. I wasn't able to boot my system using ufs:/dev/ad0a on mountroot prompt. > Is anything being done to add compatibility slice names, or to teach > mergemaster about the change? I don't know enough about what all is > going on on disk to know whether this is something that just affects > dangerously-dedicated disks, but it seems to be consistently biting > me, and I can only imagine how much trouble it's going to cause > others. Was this change even intentional? I don't think it was. For me it's a bug in GEOM_PART_MBR, which has problems detecting MBRs properly. Shame on you, Marcel!:) --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! --7CZp05NP8/gJM8Cl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFKKKkjForvXbEpPzQRAnn3AKDAMZ9QP7HZ8hq0Ei11FDwpaWqxHQCbB4td O3mUBeDwMocGz0N1GV/5XhU= =gmuT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7CZp05NP8/gJM8Cl--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090605051203.GD1705>