On Sunday, 9 December 2001 at 16:59:28 -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > Joerg Wunsch wrote: >> Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I'd love to never hear those invalid, unuseful, misleading opinions >>> from you again. >> >> ETOOMANYATTRIBUTES? :-) >> >> As long as you keep the feature of DD mode intact, i won't argue. If >> people feel like creating disks that aren't portable to another >> controller, they should do. I don't like this idea. > > We can just as easily have bootable-DD mode with a real MBR and have > freebsd start on sector #2 instead of overlapping boot1 and mbr.
This would seem to be a reasonable alternative. > This costs only one sector instead of 64 sectors (a whopping 32K, > I'm sure that is going to break the bank on today's disks). Well, the real question is the space wasted at the end, which can be up to a megabyte. Still not going to kill you, but it's aesthetically displeasing. > I'd rather that we be specific about this. If somebody wants ad2e > or da2e then they should not be using *any* fdisk tables at all. > Ie: block 0 should be empty. The problem is that if you put > /boot/boot1 in there, then suddenly it looks like a fdisk disk and > we have to have ugly magic to detect it and prevent the fake table > from being used. I would prefer that the fdisk table come out of > /boot/boot1 so that we dont have to have it by default, and we use > fdisk to install the "DD magic table" if somebody wants to make it > bootable. So where would you put the bootstrap? In sector 2? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
