Chris Turner wrote: > Matthew Dillon wrote: > >> The question is whether we can simply require that vinum partitions >> skip the label area (i.e. the starting block has to be at least 16 >> for a partition created with a normal disklabel) or whether there >> are backwards compatibility issues that require us to support vinum >> writing into the disk's label area. >> > alright.. scratch all the last message.. whatever is kept there looks to be related to saving the cfg across boots.. investigating.
- 1.9.x slices, newfs, and vinum problem? Chris Turner
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newfs, and vinum problem? Simon 'corecode' Schubert
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newfs, and vinum prob... Chris Turner
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newfs, and vinum ... Matthew Dillon
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newfs, and vi... Chris Turner
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newfs, a... Matthew Dillon
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newf... Simon 'corecode' Schubert
- Re: 1.9.x slices, ... Matthew Dillon
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newf... Chris Turner
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newf... Chris Turner
- Re: 1.9.x slices, ... Chris Turner
- Re: 1.9.x slices, newfs, and vinum prob... Matthew Dillon
