On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:36:22 -0400 (EDT) Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Bill Davidson wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:37:44 -0400 (EDT) > > Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Bill Davidson wrote: > > > > I decided to install FreeBSD and give it a try. My drive > > > > geometry is set to 193821 cyls/63 sectors/16 heads. FreeBSD's > > > > fdisk says that's > > > > > > Where are you reading that geometry? > > > > That's what FreeBSD reports to find. I also get that from linux > > fdisk. I just don't understand what will happen if I partition the > > drive using a different geometry, or if it even matters. > > No, i meant the geometry that you think it should be compared to the > gemoetry that FreeBSD thinks it should be. Here are the recommended settings from the western digital website for this drive model: 16383 cyls/63 sectors/16 heads Hmm... That's odd. Only the cylinders are different from what I've got. > > > > incorrect and wants to use 12161 cyls/63 sectors/ 255 heads. Is > > > > it safe to go ahead and create a FreeBSD partition with this > > > > drive geometry? I would prefer not to hose everything installing > > > > this ;) > > > > > > Could be that FreeBSD is doing some kind of LBA32 equivalent. > > > > So this is harmless? > > maybe. i've never used *BSD, so i don't know how it determines the > CSH numbers. If no one else pipes up here, you'd be safest to ask on > a FreeBSD list. Alright. I thought this might be more of a generic pc question. I guess not. Bill _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
