Re: why /dev/rwd0c instead of /dev/wd0c?

2006-04-14 Thread Otto Moerbeek 
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Joco Salvatti wrote:

 Hi all,

 When I run 'disklabel wd0', it returns:

 # /dev/rwd0c:

 My question is: why /dev/rwd0c instead of /dev/wd0c?

Because disklabel opens the raw device, block devices are normally
only used to access filesystems.

-Otto

Re: why /dev/rwd0c instead of /dev/wd0c?

2006-04-14 Thread Tim Donahue 
On Friday 14 April 2006 10:56, Joco Salvatti wrote:
 Hi all,

 When I run 'disklabel wd0', it returns:

 # /dev/rwd0c:

 My question is: why /dev/rwd0c instead of /dev/wd0c?

 Thanks..


From `man disklabel`:
 diskSpecify the disk to operate on.  It can be specified either by
 its full pathname or an abbreviated disk form.  In its abbreviat-
 ed form, the path to the device, the `r' denoting raw device,
 and the slice, can all be omitted.  For example, the first IDE
 disk can be specified as either /dev/rwd0c, /dev/wd0c, or wd0.


Tim Donahue

Re: why /dev/rwd0c instead of /dev/wd0c?

2006-04-14 Thread João Salvatti 
Thanks folks.

On 4/14/06, Tim Donahue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Friday 14 April 2006 10:56, Joco Salvatti wrote:
  Hi all,
 
  When I run 'disklabel wd0', it returns:
 
  # /dev/rwd0c:
 
  My question is: why /dev/rwd0c instead of /dev/wd0c?
 
  Thanks..
 

 From `man disklabel`:
  diskSpecify the disk to operate on.  It can be specified either by
  its full pathname or an abbreviated disk form.  In its abbreviat-
  ed form, the path to the device, the `r' denoting raw device,
  and the slice, can all be omitted.  For example, the first IDE
  disk can be specified as either /dev/rwd0c, /dev/wd0c, or wd0.


 Tim Donahue




--
Joco Salvatti
Undergraduating in Computer Science
Federal University of Para - UFPA
web: http://www.openbsd-pa.org
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]