Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:48:10 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: "James R. Van Artsdalen" <james-freebsd-current@jrv.org> Cc: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some notes on RootOnZFS article in wiki Message-ID: <867hsf6xhh.fsf@ds4.des.no> In-Reply-To: <4B2F9877.70201@jrv.org> (James R. Van Artsdalen's message of "Mon, 21 Dec 2009 09:47:03 -0600") References: <200912210600.46044.mel.flynn%2Bfbsd.current@mailing.thruhere.net> <20091221150514.GB75616@roberto-al.eurocontrol.fr> <4B2F9877.70201@jrv.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"James R. Van Artsdalen" <james-freebsd-current@jrv.org> writes: > Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> writes: > > On modern machines, system will boot from the GPT "freebsd-boot" > > partition w/o having it active > A correctly-written PC BIOS does not even look at (or for) a partition > table of any sort when booting. That's been the case for a > quarter-century. A system that does not boot without the active bit > set is buggy, not new vs. old. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Some MBRs look for the active bit, some don't. It doesn't mean they're buggy; it's a design decision. FWIW, ours does. Some BIOSes *do* read the partition table; there was an issue some years ago with ThinkPads that froze at boot if you installed FreeBSD on them because they misidentified the FreeBSD partition as a suspend-to-disk partition. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?867hsf6xhh.fsf>