Re: GEOM disklabel

2003-01-25 Thread Michael Reifenberger
On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
 Don't use the '-r' option, it gets confused because geom::BSD does
 not lie to it.
Yes, that seems to work...
Time to say good bye for '-r' ?

Bye!

Michael Reifenberger
^.*Plaut.*$, IT, R/3 Basis, GPS

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: GEOM disklabel

2003-01-25 Thread phk
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michael Reifenberger 
writes:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
 Don't use the '-r' option, it gets confused because geom::BSD does
 not lie to it.
Yes, that seems to work...
Time to say good bye for '-r' ?

Well, we still need it for writing the first disklabel on an otherwise
empty disk, but I think it could be implied in that case.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: GEOM disklabel

2003-01-25 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 10:17:39 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michael Reifenberger 
 writes:
 On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 ...
  Don't use the '-r' option, it gets confused because geom::BSD does
  not lie to it.
 Yes, that seems to work...
 Time to say good bye for '-r' ?
 
 Well, we still need it for writing the first disklabel on an otherwise
 empty disk, but I think it could be implied in that case.

-B implies -r too. Currenty this check prevents my bootblocks from 
writting.

-- 
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: GEOM disklabel

2003-01-24 Thread phk
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michael Reifenberger w
rites:
  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
  Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info.

--0-240786022-1043432225=:647
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Hi,
trying to disklabel new disks I get:

(nihil)(root) # disklabel -w -B da0s1 auto
(nihil)(root) # disklabel -r da0s1

Don't use the '-r' option, it gets confused because geom::BSD does
not lie to it.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues?

2003-01-13 Thread Julian Elischer

I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in
disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use
relative offsets. if the flag is not set then absolute offsets are
expected.. That would give a way for us to move forward while still
allowing partitions to co-exist with 4.x systems. 
in -current, geom just has to 'work with it' if the bit is not set.
New systems would automatically set the bit.




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues?

2003-01-13 Thread phk
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
lian Elischer writes:

I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in
disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use
relative offsets. if the flag is not set then absolute offsets are
expected.. That would give a way for us to move forward while still
allowing partitions to co-exist with 4.x systems. 
in -current, geom just has to 'work with it' if the bit is not set.
New systems would automatically set the bit.

Better plan:  Abandon BSD labels before disks outgrow them.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues?

2003-01-13 Thread Julian Elischer
I agree with that too.


On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
 lian Elischer writes:
 
 I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in
 disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use
 relative offsets. if the flag is not set then absolute offsets are
 expected.. That would give a way for us to move forward while still
 allowing partitions to co-exist with 4.x systems. 
 in -current, geom just has to 'work with it' if the bit is not set.
 New systems would automatically set the bit.
 
 Better plan:  Abandon BSD labels before disks outgrow them.
 
 -- 
 Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
 FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
 Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues?

2003-01-13 Thread walt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Julian Elischer writes:


I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in
disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use
relative offsets...



Better plan:  Abandon BSD labels before disks outgrow them.


To be replaced bywhat?




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues?

2003-01-13 Thread Julian Elischer


On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, walt wrote:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Julian Elischer writes:
  
 I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in
 disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use
 relative offsets...
 
  Better plan:  Abandon BSD labels before disks outgrow them.
 
 To be replaced bywhat?

gpt
I don't know where it comes from but I believe it's the native partition 
format for ia64 architecture machines.

 
 
 
 
 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues?

2003-01-13 Thread Peter Wemm
Julian Elischer wrote:
 
 
 On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, walt wrote:
 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Julian Elischer writes:
   
  I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in
  disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use
  relative offsets...
  
   Better plan:  Abandon BSD labels before disks outgrow them.
  
  To be replaced bywhat?
 
 gpt
 I don't know where it comes from but I believe it's the native partition 
 format for ia64 architecture machines.

Pros:
- fully 64 bit clean
- maximum of 16384 partitions
- unique id's for disks, partitions and OS types.
- we already have the basic code support for it in the tree.
- its on intel's roadmap for future i386 servers (for what thats worth) along
  with EFI.
- it is possible to boot from, but needs new boot code written(*).

Cons:
- If you follow the spec strictly, it will not share disks with another
fdisk-using OS.   If strictly implemented according to the specs, it
replaces the fdisk MBR and owns the entire disk.  Our code however isn't
that strict and will accept a GPT inside an MBR slice, meaning for i386 we
can use GPT as a replacement for disklabel.
- Booting is interesting(*).

* - When GPT is used with EFI, the firmware has got a mini OS in rom
which has native FAT32 file system support, which means we can just mount
the boot partition and copy loader.efi in there and there are *no*
bootblocks..  However, if we were to use it standalone we would not have
this and would have to boot ourselves.  The way this would be done is to put
real boot code in the MBR, which would scan the gpt table to find a boot
partition that contained the equivalent of what is now boot2.  We could
make this as big as we liked, but I'd imagine it would be 64K by default.
That boot2 code would then be able to read UFS natively, just like now.
In other words, it wouldn't be all that different to now except that
somebody has to write it.  Alternatively, we could deviate a bit from the
strict specs and reserve the entire first track for boot code and avoid
the problem that way.  This would be easier and less likely to run into
major code space pressure problems as it wouldn't have to parse GPT tables.

Personally, unless EFI on i386 actually gets off the ground, if somebody is
seriously considering this, I'd be inclined to suggest using a fairly loose
gpt interpretation and using gpt as a replacement for disklabel inside a
freebsd slice.  That way it is easy to play nice with other OS's and
less pain to deal with for booting.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Geom disklabel/fdisk issues?

2003-01-13 Thread phk
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], walt writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Julian Elischer writes:
 
I think that one of the things we need to do is declare a new flag in
disklabel that declares that the disklabel has been converted to use
relative offsets...

 Better plan:  Abandon BSD labels before disks outgrow them.

To be replaced bywhat?

Probably EFI/GPT labels

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message