On Wed, 07 Aug 2024 01:38:05 +0200,
David Uhden Collado wrote:
>
> > Generally I would expect somebody who is new to OpenBSD to do a scratch
> > install on a spare machine to try out the system, but then re-install at
> > least once rather than continue using that scratch system as their 'final'
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 at 8:17 PM
> From: "Otto Moerbeek"
>
> It's also possible to tweak the auto partitioned proposal when
> installing. Choose the appropriate option ((E)dit auto layout) and use
> the R command to resize the partition sizes you don't like.
Or just D to start from scra
nt you into
> > a corner.
>
> Now I understand the rationale. It might be beneficial for the installer to
> offer multiple templates when selecting the automatic partitioning option.
> These templates could cater to various common use cases, making the process
> more conve
Is it you that will do all these extra tests?
I would like to contribute to the best of my abilities. However, it is
evident that any improvement requires effort. If I possessed the
necessary knowledge, I would implement these changes myself and propose
them on the tech@ mailing list, just as
partitioning
option. These templates could cater to various common use cases,
making
the process more convenient and often eliminating the need for manual
disk partitioning.
The difficult problem is that there is no good definition of "common
use cases". I'm sure that the pr
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024, at 8:44 PM, Justin Yates Fletcher wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-08-07 at 01:50 +0200, David Uhden Collado wrote:
>>
>>
>> Now I understand the rationale. It might be beneficial for the
>> installer
>> to offer multiple templates when selecting the
> Now I understand the rationale. It might be beneficial for the installer
> to offer multiple templates when selecting the automatic partitioning
> option. These templates could cater to various common use cases, making
This sounds like "lots more testing needs to be done for eac
On Wed, 2024-08-07 at 01:50 +0200, David Uhden Collado wrote:
>
>
> Now I understand the rationale. It might be beneficial for the
> installer
> to offer multiple templates when selecting the automatic partitioning
> option. These templates could cater to various common u
ere is to start with sane defaults, not immediately paint you into
a corner.
Now I understand the rationale. It might be beneficial for the installer
to offer multiple templates when selecting the automatic partitioning
option. These templates could cater to various common use cases, making
the pr
nd
reconfigure everything to its present state. I think this situation is
common for many individuals.
But more specifically to the issue of disk partitioning, there are three other
points here:
Firstly, the physically last partition that the installer automatically creates
is mounted on /ho
On Sun, Aug 4, 2024 at 6:24 PM David Uhden Collado wrote:
> I would like to understand the rationale behind this design choice. Is
> there a specific reason why the automatic partitioning is limited to
> around 350GB for system partitions? Any insights or explanations you can
> prov
On 8/4/24 15:16, David Uhden Collado wrote:
Hello,
I have observed that the automatic partitioning feature of disklabel(8)
does not allocate more than approximately 350GB to system partitions
[1]. In my opinion, the tool should have been designed to use all
available space on the storage device
later want it. A
re-install is not a bad thing.
(In fact, part of my job is to re-install our servers from scratch for every
release - we never use the upgrade tools.)
But more specifically to the issue of disk partitioning, there are three other
points here:
Firstly, the physically last partiti
> Why not just use a custom disklabel template that suits your needs?
This is the -t option to /sbin/disklabel.
How is it possible to use a custom template from the OpenBSD installer?
On the other hand, this workaround is not the most convenient since one
typically does not reinstall OpenBSD f
that the automatic partitioning feature of disklabel(8)
> does not allocate more than approximately 350GB to system partitions
> [1]. In my opinion, the tool should have been designed to use all
> available space on the storage device when partitioning. To address this
> limitation, I had
On 2024-08-04 21:16, David Uhden Collado wrote:
> Hello,
> I have observed that the automatic partitioning feature of disklabel(8)
> does not allocate more than approximately 350GB to system partitions
> [1]. In my opinion, the tool should have been designed to use all
> availab
On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 09:16:52PM +0200, David Uhden Collado wrote:
> To address this limitation, I had to
> write a custom program that calculates partition sizes to maintain their
> initial proportions while occupying the entire storage device.
Why not just use a custom disklabel template that
Hello,
I have observed that the automatic partitioning feature of disklabel(8)
does not allocate more than approximately 350GB to system partitions
[1]. In my opinion, the tool should have been designed to use all
available space on the storage device when partitioning. To address this
On 2023-05-13 11:16:13, Allan Streib wrote:
> On Sat, May 13, 2023, at 09:19, Sylvain Saboua wrote:
>
> > Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
> > /dev/sd1a 986M986M -49.1M 105%/
>
> You have something else using space on your root partition.
>
> From my machi
On Sat, 13 May 2023 11:16:13 -0500, Allan Streib wrote:
> On Sat, May 13, 2023, at 09:19, Sylvain Saboua wrote:
>
>> Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
>> /dev/sd1a 986M986M -49.1M 105%/
>
> You have something else using space on your root partition.
>
> Fro
On Sat, May 13, 2023, at 09:19, Sylvain Saboua wrote:
> Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
> /dev/sd1a 986M986M -49.1M 105%/
You have something else using space on your root partition.
>From my machine, (7.3 amd64):
/dev/sd0a 1005M214M740M23
n.
No need for replying unless you want to correct me.
> The point of auto-allocation is that this computation is done for you.
I would be glad to just accept the auto-allocation, but
https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html#Partitioning
says this:
"not be a perfect layout"
"a good star
On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 11:15:13AM +0200, u...@mailo.com wrote:
> Also asked on:
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/676245/openbsd-core-dump-and-var-size
>
> I'm trying to figure out my partitioning which leads to
> https://man.openbsd.org/disklabel#AUTOMATIC_DISK_ALL
Twice the size of physical memory is norm for swap partition
On November 5, 2021 3:15:13 AM MDT, u...@mailo.com wrote:
>Also asked on:
>https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/676245/openbsd-core-dump-and-var-size
>
>I'm trying to figure out my partitioning whic
Also asked on:
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/676245/openbsd-core-dump-and-var-size
I'm trying to figure out my partitioning which leads to
https://man.openbsd.org/disklabel#AUTOMATIC_DISK_ALLOCATION
which says:
"/var13% of disk. 80M – 2x size of crash dump"
Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:27:53 + John Long
> > Ideally, the auto partition could have templates, for the cases you
> > have.
>
> I think this is a good idea but I guess a lot of people will bang you
> on the head for suggesting it ;)
> I don't know that I have ever seen the one-size fits all
> > Seems to me, after trying to install OpenBSD on a new box, a lot of
> > the helpful in the FAQ is totally AWOL now and I find it hard to
> > get all the info together.
>
> Hi John,
>
> Person came from somewhere and cut out a lot of the useful hardware
> info.
> At least now it's maintainable
Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:37:32 + John Long
> On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:16 +0300, IL Ka wrote:
> > Do you want to really build all ports or just fetch skeletons and
> > build some of them?
>
> Not sure, but I don't want to rule out building them all for a couple
> or reasons. I have a new box whic
Le 26 juin 2018 16:49:57 GMT+02:00, lea.chesco...@tutanota.com a écrit :
>Personally, what i always do, (i dont know if its the best practice,
>but it fixes my storage space problems, as i always use -stable, and
>build the updated ports) is to make a symlink in /home
>
>Initial configuration
> $
Personally, what i always do, (i dont know if its the best practice, but it
fixes my storage space problems, as i always use -stable, and build the updated
ports) is to make a symlink in /home
Initial configuration
$ cd /home
$ doas mkdir ports
$ doas chown -R user:wsrc ports
$ cd ports
John Long writes:
> Been a while and don't have my other OpenBSD boxes accessible.
>
> What are the recommended partitions and appropriate sizes for people
> who want to track stable and possibly build the whole ports tree?
>
> Thanks,
>
> /jl
hello
If you want to do a bulk build (aka whole po
Thanks @bryanharris and @bruno
Thanks guys, I will check out the links.
/jl
The webserver is called httpd (not the apache one). I like this book but
some people don't need the extra help of a book (I do).
https://www.michaelwlucas.com/tools/relayd
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 11:49 AM John Long wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 10:15 -0500, Vijay Sankar wrote:
> > Here is my d
On 25.06.2018 14:17, John Long wrote:
Been a while and don't have my other OpenBSD boxes accessible.
What are the recommended partitions and appropriate sizes for people
who want to track stable and possibly build the whole ports tree?
Thanks,
/jl
Check the detailed explanation given by Ingo
On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 10:15 -0500, Vijay Sankar wrote:
> Here is my df -h output -- Just as an FYI I was testing some
> workarounds for the samba virusfilter issue and then made some
> mistakes that screwed up KDE etc. So decided to build it from
> scratch
> and have about 5000 packages built
Quoting John Long :
On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 09:25 -0500, Vijay Sankar wrote:
Quoting John Long :
> Been a while and don't have my other OpenBSD boxes accessible.
>
> What are the recommended partitions and appropriate sizes for
> people
> who want to track stable and possibly build the whole p
On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 09:25 -0500, Vijay Sankar wrote:
> Quoting John Long :
>
> > Been a while and don't have my other OpenBSD boxes accessible.
> >
> > What are the recommended partitions and appropriate sizes for
> > people
> > who want to track stable and possibly build the whole ports tree?
On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:16 +0300, IL Ka wrote:
> Do you want to really build all ports or just fetch skeletons and
> build some of them?
Not sure, but I don't want to rule out building them all for a couple
or reasons. I have a new box which is probably fast enough to make it
worthwhile to build
Quoting John Long :
Been a while and don't have my other OpenBSD boxes accessible.
What are the recommended partitions and appropriate sizes for people
who want to track stable and possibly build the whole ports tree?
Thanks,
/jl
Hi,
Hopefully more knowledgeable people may give us better
Do you want to really build all ports or just fetch skeletons and build
some of them?
For skeletons, automatic layout is good enough, but I recommend to increase
/usr/src a little and decrease /home.
Make sure you have ~ 5GB for /usr/src/ and /usr/obj.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 3:17 PM, John Lo
Been a while and don't have my other OpenBSD boxes accessible.
What are the recommended partitions and appropriate sizes for people
who want to track stable and possibly build the whole ports tree?
Thanks,
/jl
On 11/10/17 16:55, r...@sfm-consulting.at wrote:
> So I actually double checked and yes, I am marking an A6 partition as
> bootable/active. So where could the error be originating from?
>
> Thanks for any hints and help!
well, so much for the easy solution.
It sounds like you are trying to do a
So I actually double checked and yes, I am marking an A6 partition as
bootable/active. So where could the error be originating from?
Thanks for any hints and help!
Sorry, I meant “A6” of course!
بداية الرسالة المحولة:
> من: Nick Holland
> التاريخ: ٩ نوفمبر، ٢٠١٧، ١١:٣٢:١٢ م جرينتش+١
> إلى: misc@openbsd.org
> الموضوع: رد: Partitioning on MacBook Pro for triple booting
>
>> On 11/09/17 13:42, SFM wrote:
>> ...
>> The ta
On 11/09/17 13:42, SFM wrote:
...
> The target:
>
> Triple boot Mac OS X, OpenBSD and DragonFly BSD from the same drive
> (there are quite a few reasons for this, do not call me a masochist,
> at least not in public).
no need, you already described your behavior. ;)
>
> The problem: As I, of co
Hi everyone !
Up to now I have failed to do what the header says and I would love to know the
reason, probably I am missing an/some important step(s).
The hardware:
MacBook Pro mid 2012 with EFI, a single 480GB SSD and 16GB RAM.
The preps:
Installed latest MacOS X (I am using the new “Appl
On 01/26/16 17:20, freeu...@ruggedinbox.com wrote:
exist 4.2BSD with NTFS/MSDOS partition on same volume.
it will be destroy the which partition's file data.
Any time I get the scary and creepy this situation.
*example 4.2BSD with NTFS
1.formatting SATA HDD on OpenBSD:
newfs sd1c
2.formatting s
exist 4.2BSD with NTFS/MSDOS partition on same volume.
it will be destroy the which partition's file data.
Any time I get the scary and creepy this situation.
*example 4.2BSD with NTFS
1.formatting SATA HDD on OpenBSD:
newfs sd1c
2.formatting same HDD on Windows:
3.check the partition:
disklabe
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Carlos Fenollosa
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m a new OpenBSD user, so please forgive me if this topic has been discussed
> thoroughly already.
>
> I installed a new box using the default partitioning (2GB for /usr) and I
> found that it’s a bit in
> everyone has different needs of course, but in my 15+
> years of openbsd usage both on desktop and servers i
> needed to build ports exactly hand, give or take> times.
Same experience my end too with OpenBSD. I have had a couple very rare
occasions in a long time that something may have needed
Carlos Fenollosa, 29 Jun 2015 15:24:
> Hi Tim, this is true. However, at some point, even
> novice users might need to build a port to apply some
> errata. If that port is one of the big ones (php, in
> my case), they may realize that they don’t have
> enough disk space.
everyone has different ne
> However, at some point, even novice users might need to build a port to apply
> some errata.
For novice users the documentation recommends using packages mainly.
> If that port is one of the big ones (php, in my case), they may
> realize that they don’t have enough disk space.
> Granted, there
> Novice users are strongly encouraged to use packages and not to build
> ports. Learn the system first, then you can play around with ports and
> disk partitioning, etc.
>
> Sounds like a pain in the butt, but BSD is great in that there is a
> relativly strong seperation of sy
anâ** on all subfolders so there is nothing else to get space from.
>
> Anyway, my goal bringing this up was to try to accommodate the sizes. a
> bit better for novice users who run with the default system partitioning.
>
Novice users are strongly encouraged to use packages and not to build
falls under the >7GB partitioning. Regarding the fact
> that the installer is flexible, I know, I was only pointing out that maybe
> the default value for /usr is a bit small. Somebody who wants to build a lot
> of ports probably knows enough to change the default value.
>
>
Hi all,
Thanks for all the information. I had read disklabel(8) and my indication of
/usr/src was actually my mistake, it has indeed its own partition. Sorry for
that.
My disk has 80 GB so it falls under the >7GB partitioning. Regarding the fact
that the installer is flexible, I know, I
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Chris Bennett <
chrisbenn...@bennettconstruction.us> wrote:
> Why only up to p?
It is a historical limitation.
> Could this be easily changed...
No, it would break a number of things.
> ...or would that be a major project?
Yes.
> I would really like to
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 05:59:09PM -0500, James Hartley wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Carlos Fenollosa <
> carlos.fenoll...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I installed a new box using the default partitioning (2GB for /usr) and I
> > found that it???s a
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Carlos Fenollosa <
carlos.fenoll...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I installed a new box using the default partitioning (2GB for /usr) and I
> found that itâs a bit insufficient since /usr/ports, /usr/xenocara and
> /usr/src hang from there on the same
Alexander
On 2015-06-29 00:42, Raf Czlonka wrote:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 11:15:20PM BST, Carlos Fenollosa wrote:
Hi,
Hi Carlos,
I’m a new OpenBSD user, so please forgive me if this topic has been
discussed thoroughly already.
I installed a new box using the default partitioning (2GB f
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 11:15:20PM BST, Carlos Fenollosa wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Carlos,
> I’m a new OpenBSD user, so please forgive me if this topic has been
> discussed thoroughly already.
>
> I installed a new box using the default partitioning (2GB for
> /usr) and I fou
Hi,
I’m a new OpenBSD user, so please forgive me if this topic has been discussed
thoroughly already.
I installed a new box using the default partitioning (2GB for /usr) and I found
that it’s a bit insufficient since /usr/ports, /usr/xenocara and /usr/src hang
from there on the same partition
ed to retry my partitioning sd0a at an offset of
128 sectors from the start of sd0c (instead of the default 64-sector
offset I'd used previously).
For reasons that are now clear to me after grokking naddy & otto's
diagrams, this worked fine (zeroing the first megabyte no longer trashed
Here's a patch to FAQ 14 and to FAQ 4. It encorporates
both Otto's recommended clarity improvement and Jason's recommended
reference in 4.6.3.
Index: www/faq/faq14.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/www/faq/faq14.html,v
retrieving revision 1.24
On 11/05/2014 06:42 AM, Josh Grosse wrote:
> On 2014-11-05 09:25, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>
>> Here's a sketch:
>>
>>biosboot
>> :
>> MBR : disklabel
>> :: :
>> 0 : 1 64 : 65 : 66
>> |=|===
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 09:42:42AM -0500, Josh Grosse wrote:
> On 2014-11-05 09:25, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>
> >Here's a sketch:
> >
> > biosboot
> > :
> >MBR : disklabel
> > :: :
> > 0 : 1 64 : 65
On 2014-11-05 09:25, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
Here's a sketch:
biosboot
:
MBR : disklabel
:: :
0 : 1 64 : 65 : 66
|=|==|=|=|=|==|==>
|
On 2014-11-04, Jonathan Thornburg wrote:
> It's as if the 'a' partition I created (which started at offset 64) was
> actually overlapping the disklabel metadata!
Well, it does.
On architectures that use the MBR partition scheme, the disklabel
is located in the second sector of the OpenBSD area.
t; > sectors/track: 63
> > tracks/cylinder: 255
> > sectors/cylinder: 16065
> > cylinders: 91201
> > total sectors: 1465149168
> > boundstart: 64
> > boundend: 1465144065
> > drivedata: 0
> >
> > 16 partitions:
> > #
> If it's a new disk, you don't need to zero anything. That's to clean up
> previous RAID array data.
>
> That doesn't really answer the question of what is going wrong but at
> least it gets you up and running.
>
> Tim.
>
Well, I take it back. The FAQ does say to zero a crypto partition. I
nev
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Brian McCafferty
wrote:
> On 11/03/14 22:33, Jonathan Thornburg wrote:
> > I'm trying to set up 5.6/amd64 on a new-from-the-factory 750GB disk
> > which I've just had installed in a Thinkpad T60. (This Thinkpad had
> > previously been running 5.5/amd64 using an o
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 00:53:38 -0500 Brian McCafferty wrote:
> On 11/03/14 22:33, Jonathan Thornburg wrote:
> > I'm trying to set up 5.6/amd64 on a new-from-the-factory 750GB disk
> > which I've just had installed in a Thinkpad T60. (This Thinkpad had
> > previously been running 5.5/amd64 using an
[fsize bsize cpg]
> c: 14651491680 unused
> #
>
> It's as if the 'a' partition I created (which started at offset 64) was
> actually overlapping the disklabel metadata!
>
> One other data point: I also saw the sa
On 11/03/14 22:33, Jonathan Thornburg wrote:
> I'm trying to set up 5.6/amd64 on a new-from-the-factory 750GB disk
> which I've just had installed in a Thinkpad T60. (This Thinkpad had
> previously been running 5.5/amd64 using an older/smaller disk, with
> no problems).
>
> I want to try having t
point: I also saw the same behavior ('a' partition gone,
duid zeroed) when I repeated the same commands but with the (recreated)
'a' partition having the default '4.2BSD' fstype instead of 'RAID'.
Can anyone clue me in as to what's I'm doing wr
> > >
> > > I did a complete deletion of all partitions of an external usb hd by
> > > means of diskmgmt.msc under windows, followed by partitioning and
> > > formating to msdos fat32 with kind help of acronis true image since
> > > windows xp does not do such
means of diskmgmt.msc under windows, followed by partitioning and
> > formating to msdos fat32 with kind help of acronis true image since
> > windows xp does not do such things natively.
> >
> > Very unexpectedly (to me) under OpenBSD the fdisk output (see below)
> > reflec
On Sep 11 12:48:40, MERIGHI Marcus wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I did a complete deletion of all partitions of an external usb hd by
> means of diskmgmt.msc under windows, followed by partitioning and
> formating to msdos fat32 with kind help of acronis true image since
> windows x
Hello,
I did a complete deletion of all partitions of an external usb hd by
means of diskmgmt.msc under windows, followed by partitioning and
formating to msdos fat32 with kind help of acronis true image since
windows xp does not do such things natively.
Very unexpectedly (to me) under OpenBSD
> I tend to get old computers from folks that upgrade and actually
> have a DNS Server running on an Intel built for windows95. :)
Yeah, BSDs deal fine with old computers and limited resources. I love
that, too. :)
> And for the sake of comparison, I have a FreeBSD machine with ZFS
> filesystem
Darrel
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, Micha? Markowski wrote:
2012/6/26 Darrel :
does anyone have some neat ideas about partitions under /var?
Are you familiar with FAQ?
http://openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html#Partitioning
Good point, Micha.
I should consider /var/www
Thank you,
Darrel
We have less limitation on partitioning these days, so /usr/obj
was obvious- actually had that one before. I chose /usr/src and
/usr/local as well, and expect that this was unimportant unless
moving into NFS or some special circumstance.
I have looked at some of the things that folks are doing
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, Norman Golisz wrote:
Hi Darrel,
On Tue Jun 26 2012 14:58, Darrel wrote:
We have less limitation on partitioning these days, so /usr/obj
was obvious- actually had that one before. I chose /usr/src and
/usr/local as well, and expect that this was unimportant unless
moving
On 2012-06-26, Norman Golisz wrote:
> /dev/sd2o 246M5.1M229M 2%/var/log
useful one this, to protect your system logs against things like too
much disk space taken by email/databases/etc.
2012/6/26 Darrel :
> does anyone have some neat ideas about partitions under /var?
Are you familiar with FAQ?
http://openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html#Partitioning
--
Michał Markowski
Hi Darrel,
On Tue Jun 26 2012 14:58, Darrel wrote:
> We have less limitation on partitioning these days, so /usr/obj
> was obvious- actually had that one before. I chose /usr/src and
> /usr/local as well, and expect that this was unimportant unless
> moving into NFS or some special
>
> From: Darrel
> Sent: Tue Jun 26 20:58:20 CEST 2012
> To:
> Subject: partitioning with more mount points on obsd51
>
>
> We have less limitation on partitioning these days, so /usr/obj
> was obvious- actually had that on
We have less limitation on partitioning these days, so /usr/obj
was obvious- actually had that one before. I chose /usr/src and
/usr/local as well, and expect that this was unimportant unless
moving into NFS or some special circumstance.
I have looked at some of the things that folks are doing
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 11:06:42AM -0600, Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote:
> - what is the best facility to log wifi usage to syslog on an openbsd
> host? have used hostapd in the past, it's pretty sweet but not practical
> for guest users or wireless appliances
Some APs can log associations to remote
am looking to partition some wifi networks into multiple segments and am
looking for both hardware and software advice. the goal is to have > 2
wifi networks in the same physical location that are split as follows:
- guest AP for visitors and friends
- business AP for coworkers
- appliance AP f
> Sorry for top-posting, but please: Disk sectors start with 1
Just pathetic. Hope you actually get a life sometime.
ehalf Of
Kenneth R Westerback
> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 5:38 PM
> To: Josh Grosse
> Cc: Amarendra Godbole; misc
> Subject: Re: Partitioning an external USB drive through OpenBSD --
disklabel
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 08:53:45AM -0500, Josh Grosse wrote:
> > On
Godbole; misc
Subject: Re: Partitioning an external USB drive through OpenBSD -- disklabel
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 08:53:45AM -0500, Josh Grosse wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:44:08 +0530, Amarendra Godbole wrote
>
> > Thank you all for responses -- I have a better idea now. The on
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 08:53:45AM -0500, Josh Grosse wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:44:08 +0530, Amarendra Godbole wrote
>
> > Thank you all for responses -- I have a better idea now. The only
> > thing that I noticed was newfs_msdos wipes out the entire disklabel
> > as well as any fdisk creat
Amarendra Godbole wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>> The disklabel is written at the start of the disk and you're
>> overwriting it with the newfs_msdos command. You should fdisk the
>> disk first, and reserve a separate MBR partition for MSDOS.
>>
>> See the FAQ.
>
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:44:08 +0530, Amarendra Godbole wrote
> Thank you all for responses -- I have a better idea now. The only
> thing that I noticed was newfs_msdos wipes out the entire disklabel
> as well as any fdisk created partitions and gobbles up the entire disk.
>
> I guess what James H
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> The disklabel is written at the start of the disk and you're
> overwriting it with the newfs_msdos command. You should fdisk the
> disk first, and reserve a separate MBR partition for MSDOS.
>
> See the FAQ.
Thank you all for responses -- I
The disklabel is written at the start of the disk and you're
overwriting it with the newfs_msdos command. You should fdisk the
disk first, and reserve a separate MBR partition for MSDOS.
See the FAQ.
-Otto
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 03:30:23PM +0530, Amarendra Godbole wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I h
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009, Amarendra Godbole wrote:
Hi,
I have a 320G Buffalo Ministation external USB drive, which I wish to
partition so that it contains 1 DOS and 1 native OpenBSD (FFS)
partition. Using disklabel, I could created these:
p
OpenBSD area: 0-625142448; size: 625142448; free: 0
#
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:30:23 +0530, Amarendra Godbole wrote:
>Also, is there another way to achieve this? (I was unable to create a
>MSDOS partition from Windows XP, as it only allows NTFS now).
I'm not sure about all of your question but in the last week I created
an MSDOS partition on a laptop
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
