You may not want to mirror the boot block. That way you can update one
boot block, test it before copying the other. If the new boot block
fails to boot, the BIOS should go to the next hard drive and boot the
mirror. I don't know if it's possible to detect which drive you're
actually booting
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Paul Kraus wrote:
> On May 12, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Outback Dingo wrote:
>
> > notice my boot pool is a mirror, so disk 2 is identical to disk1, so if
> > disk1 ever dies, logically i could boot from disk two
>
> The zpool mirror does not mirror the bootbloc
On May 12, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Outback Dingo wrote:
> notice my boot pool is a mirror, so disk 2 is identical to disk1, so if
> disk1 ever dies, logically i could boot from disk two
The zpool mirror does not mirror the bootblock. You need to manually
add that to all the drives you may wan
notice my boot pool is a mirror, so disk 2 is identical to disk1, so if
disk1 ever dies, logically i could boot from disk two
pool: tank
state: ONLINE
scan: scrub repaired 0 in 0h0m with 0 errors on Sat May 11 13:20:41 2013
config:
NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
tank
On 12. mai 2013, at 15:21, Roland van Laar wrote:
> I see that all the disks get the same partitions, including swap and boot?
> Why is that? And do I need those 5 boot and swap partitions?
You don't need them, but there's a good chance you'll want them.
Long story, short version: with raidz a
Hello,
I'm following the raidz[1] and mirror[2] guides for a ZFS root.
For a test installation on a 5 disk Virtualbox environment.
I see that all the disks get the same partitions, including swap and boot?
Why is that? And do I need those 5 boot and swap partitions?
Thank you for your time,
Ro
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 09:00 -0600, Warren Block wrote:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Standard practice for this list is to Cc the responder and the list,
because people are not required to subscribe to post.
That makes sense and does explain
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:15:43AM +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 15:37 -0700, leeoliveshackelf...@surewest.net wrote:
> > Please Cc responses to the mailing list
>
> I know that it's tolerated by the FreeBSD lists, but for most mailing
> lists nowadays it's common to reply to
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 09:00 -0600, Warren Block wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Standard practice for this list is to Cc the responder and the list,
> because people are not required to subscribe to post.
That makes sense and does explain why my last mail came through the
list
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 15:37 -0700, leeoliveshackelf...@surewest.net wrote:
Please Cc responses to the mailing list
Actually, I had written that in a reply.
I know that it's tolerated by the FreeBSD lists, but for most mailing
lists nowadays it's comm
On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 15:37 -0700, leeoliveshackelf...@surewest.net wrote:
> Please Cc responses to the mailing list
I know that it's tolerated by the FreeBSD lists, but for most mailing
lists nowadays it's common to reply to the list only. Most MUA nowadays
provide an option to automatically repl
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013, leeoliveshackelf...@surewest.net wrote:
Dear Mr. Block, Greetings. Thank you for your response to my message.
Your instruction to change the name of the disk drive from ah0 to aha0
worked. I can now boot FreeBSD. The next trick will be to attempt t
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, leeoliveshackelf...@surewest.net wrote:
Good evening, Free BSD enthusiasts. Thank you to each of the several
people who have responded to my previous messages. I have made
significant progress, but am now flummoxed at the installation of the
boot loader. The handbook sa
Hi,
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:11:24 -0700 (PDT)
wrote:
> Good evening, Free BSD enthusiasts. Thank you to each of the several
good morning,
> people who have responded to my previous messages. I have made
> significant progress, but am now flummoxed at the installation of the
this is good to
Good evening, Free BSD enthusiasts. Thank you to each of the several people
who have responded to my previous messages. I have made significant progress,
but am now flummoxed at the installation of the boot loader. The handbook says
to run this command, "boot0cfg -B ad0". When I run this com
Lee,
Are you using DOS-style or GPT partitions? I'm assuming DOS-style,
and the rest of this email is only correct if that's the case, so
correct me if I'm wrong.
There's actually two partition tables at work here -- the "big" one,
that lives at the start of the physical disk and divides up the
F
Good afternoon, FreeBSD enthusiasts. I am attempting to install FreeBSD 9.1 on
a dual-boot configuration with Windows XP. I am using bsdinstall. I do not
wish for the partition table to be changed. How do I instruct bsdinstall to
skip the re-partitioning step? It gives an error message
Hi Lee,
One option to have a FreeBSD system on winxp, without any partitioning to the
existing hard disk, is to have freebsd as a vm on virtualbox. For having a dual
boot system you would need to partition the existing disk . If you have a
second had disk you could select it and let FreeBSD
On Mar 15, 2013 12:48 AM, wrote:
>
> Good afternoon, FreeBSD enthusiasts. I am attempting to install FreeBSD
9.1 on a dual-boot configuration with Windows XP. I am using bsdinstall.
I do not wish for the partition table to be changed. How do I instruct
bsdinstall to skip the re-partit
Good afternoon, FreeBSD enthusiasts. I am attempting to install FreeBSD 9.1 on
a dual-boot configuration with Windows XP. I am using bsdinstall. I do not
wish for the partition table to be changed. How do I instruct bsdinstall to
skip the re-partitioning step? It gives an error message
gt; Cancel -> "Installation...with some errors" (IOW no
installation ;) -> ok -> Exit install -> # exit (Exit shell, back to
installer) ->
I continued this trial with the regular installer.
Install -> Keymap..., Hostname..., [*] doc games lib32 ports [ ] src ->
Par
more.
Did it previously show them? I don't know if gpart supports
BSD-typical partitioning (i. e. partitions inside a slice)...
Yes, it does. But it won't show them unless you look in ada0s1.
bsdlabel partitions are inside slices.
___
free
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Screenshots from Linux's GParted:
http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-012707am.php
http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-014310am.php
Perhaps somebody can exactly write the steps I have to do, to install
FreeBSD on /dev/sda1.
I
...
On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 02:17 +0100, Polytropon wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 01:54:59 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > Screenshots from Linux's GParted:
> > http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-012707am.php
> > http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-014310am.php
>
> Judgin
On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 02:17 +0100, Polytropon wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 01:05:00 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > ada0 298 GB MBR
> > ada0s1 57 GB freebsd
> > ada0s2 240 GB EBR
> > [snip]
> >
> > gpart show also doesn't display the 3 ufs and the swap any more.
>
> Did it previously show them
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 01:54:59 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Screenshots from Linux's GParted:
> http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-012707am.php
> http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-014310am.php
Judging from the screenshots, /dev/sda1 = /dev/ad0s1, a
"DOS primary partiti
lay the 3 ufs and the swap any more.
Did it previously show them? I don't know if gpart supports
BSD-typical partitioning (i. e. partitions inside a slice)...
Option: The partition data has been lost. Only the slice "enclosing"
them has been kept.
> So I neither can i
Screenshots from Linux's GParted:
http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-012707am.php
http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-12172012-014310am.php
Perhaps somebody can exactly write the steps I have to do, to install
FreeBSD on /dev/sda1.
I guess a swap and / is enough, but swap, /,
Since partitioning didn't work with FreeBSD 9.0 64bit, I tried PC-BSD
8.2 64bit and partitioning worked.
I had PC-BSD installed on ada0s1, this was the fstab:
/dev/label/rootfs0 / ufs rw,noatime
1 1
/dev/label/swap0
On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
On 2012.11.25 21:49, Warren Block wrote:
For a hard drive, 4K alignment and starting the main partition at 1M is
good.
Why would one leave 1024 full kbits before the first partition on a HDD ?
The second only is only relevant to GPT.
We went over t
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 02:22 +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
> Hi Warren,
>
> On 2012.11.25 21:49, Warren Block wrote:
> > For a hard drive, 4K alignment and starting the main partition at 1M is
> > good.
> Why would one leave 1024 full kbits before the first partition on a HDD ?
"Create a partition
Hi Warren,
On 2012.11.25 21:49, Warren Block wrote:
> For a hard drive, 4K alignment and starting the main partition at 1M is
> good.
Why would one leave 1024 full kbits before the first partition on a HDD ?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 13:49 -0700, Warren Block wrote:
> Realize this multi-boot stuff is painful and inconvenient and install
> everything in a VM?
Unfortunately this is impossible.
I'll install FreeBSD, because there's a driver for my sound card, a RME
HDSPe AIO, that perhaps enables to use al
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
This is what I've got:
# gpart show ada0
=> 63 625142385 ada0 MBR (298G)
63 121274683 - free - (57G)
[snip]
IIUC I now have to do:
# gpart add -s 64k -t freebsd-boot -l boot0 ada0
# gpart add -s 8G -t freebsd-swap -l swap0 ada0
# gpart
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 15:42:38 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Polytropon, I'll use journaling.
That should give you additional "security in integrity",
especially on a "everything in one /" partition.
> I've to apologize for my broken English.
No understanding problem here.
> Regarding to the "
Polytropon, I'll use journaling.
I've to apologize for my broken English.
Regarding to the "comment" line my question is, if it's enough to us a #
at the beginning, or if it's needed to begin and to end with a #. I
suspect just a # at the beginning is needed.
_
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 14:37 +0100, Polytropon wrote:
> BTW, I still have some Atari ST hardware here. Impressive what has
> been possible with this (quite limited) machines, but with _efficient_
> programs...
I still have the C64 in some cartons and the Atari ST is still beside my
PC, but I don't
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 15:10 +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
> On 2012.11.25 14:35, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > I don't need it, but I could add it for what ever worst case emergency
> > scenario and GRUB in the MBR anyway will work?
> I don't see how it could ever come in handy, and I'm not sure it
> woul
On 25/11/2012 12:29, Polytropon wrote:
Won't be wrong; my understanding of the rule was "2 * size of
_possible_ RAM in the machine". But disk space is cheap, so
8 G should be fine. But again, the requirement for the swap
partition depends on what you're doing with the machine and
what you're expe
On 2012.11.25 14:35, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> I don't need it, but I could add it for what ever worst case emergency
> scenario and GRUB in the MBR anyway will work?
I don't see how it could ever come in handy, and I'm not sure it
wouldn't do any hamr either. The /boot/gptboot code to be written weigh
i?query=gpart&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+9.0-RELEASE&arch=default&format=html
> # newfs -U /dev/gpt/root
Maybe you would also consider using -J (journaling). Still the
traditional approach when using functional partitioning is to
format the / partition without sof
me good support for this
case in specialized Linux distributions.
> > Doing "functional partitioning" requires at least an idea
> > of how much disk space will be needed per functional part,
> > and this can differ from use as server or desktop, or what
> > kind
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 14:13 +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
> On 2012.11.25 13:57, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > IIUC "Install the GPT bootcode into the boot partition" has to be done
> > and is independent of the GRUB in the MBR.
> Not in your case. You won't need bootcode other than GRUB's (in the MBR,
>
At the moment I still have:
This is what I've got:
# gpart show ada0
=> 63 625142385 ada0 MBR (298G)
63 121274683 - free - (57G)
[snip]
Regarding to http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html
for my set up it should be ok to run:
# gpart add -t freebsd-boot -l boot -
On 2012.11.25 13:57, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> IIUC "Install the GPT bootcode into the boot partition" has to be done
> and is independent of the GRUB in the MBR.
Not in your case. You won't need bootcode other than GRUB's (in the MBR,
and the Linux partition where the bulk of it is installed).
___
I'm reading http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html at
the moment.
Seemingly there are many outdated howtos first hits for searching with
Google. I frst read 64k for boot and now 512k.
IIUC "Install the GPT bootcode into the boot partition" has to be done
and is independent of the
er when everything is aligned to 4k.
> But they _work_ with any other alignment.
I'll use 4k.
> > How to continue after this is done?
>
> You will have new partitions /dev/ada0pN. You need to format
> them with newfs. If I see this correctly, you have created
> one big
On 2012.11.25 12:26, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Here I already don't understand how large the swap should be. Really 2 *
> size of the RAM?
It depends on use patterns and the amount of RAM in your computer. 1.5*
to 2* installed memory is a traditional "works for most" value, but I
feel it's outdated for
_work_ with any other alignment.
> How to continue after this is done?
You will have new partitions /dev/ada0pN. You need to format
them with newfs. If I see this correctly, you have created
one big / partition (for everything); this is _valid_ and
possible, but may be less optimum for a c
This is what I've got:
# gpart show ada0
=> 63 625142385 ada0 MBR (298G)
63 121274683 - free - (57G)
[snip]
IIUC I now have to do:
# gpart add -s 64k -t freebsd-boot -l boot0 ada0
# gpart add -s 8G -t freebsd-swap -l swap0 ada0
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs -a 256k -l root0 ada0
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 21:33:16 -0400, Warren Block
wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Lynn Steven Killingsworth wrote:
I have installed PC-BSD 9.1 RC1 last week. Very nice I must say.
The default file system is zfs. I have one storage disk which is ufs
and another which is on an mbr partition.
from "Lynn Steven Killingsworth" :
> I have installed PC-BSD 9.1 RC1 last week. Very nice I must say.
> The default file system is zfs. I have one storage disk which is ufs and
> another which is on an mbr partition. I thought I would format the mbr
> disk with zfs and move everything from the
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Lynn Steven Killingsworth wrote:
I have installed PC-BSD 9.1 RC1 last week. Very nice I must say.
The default file system is zfs. I have one storage disk which is ufs and
another which is on an mbr partition. I thought I would format the mbr disk
with zfs and move ever
Dear FreeBSD -
I have installed PC-BSD 9.1 RC1 last week. Very nice I must say.
The default file system is zfs. I have one storage disk which is ufs and
another which is on an mbr partition. I thought I would format the mbr
disk with zfs and move everything from the ufs disk and then form
On 16/01/2012 09:55, Matthias Apitz wrote:
El día Monday, January 16, 2012 a las 09:45:23AM +0100, Bernard Higonnet
escribió:
I am trying to install 9.0 on a small notebook on which I have
previously successfully installed 8.2.
I don't get very far. When defining partitions I have opted for G
El día Monday, January 16, 2012 a las 09:45:23AM +0100, Bernard Higonnet
escribió:
> I am trying to install 9.0 on a small notebook on which I have
> previously successfully installed 8.2.
>
> I don't get very far. When defining partitions I have opted for Guided
> and chosen a drive with enou
I am trying to install 9.0 on a small notebook on which I have
previously successfully installed 8.2.
I don't get very far. When defining partitions I have opted for Guided
and chosen a drive with enough space (3.5GB), Entire disk. I am then
asked if I'm sure I want to proceed, to which I answ
I booted the 8.2-RELEASE CD on my Intel mac mini, which has a thumb drive
plugged into USB.
I promptly entered FIXIT and used dd to zero out the ENTIRE internal hard
drive. I may use it, I may not, but for now I want to reduce variables and I
don't want remnants of OSX on that disk tripping m
On Sat, 4 Jun 2011, Robert Simmons wrote:
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Warren Block wrote:
There's a sample in the second half of my disk setup article:
http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html
Looks good. I have a few critiques:
1) Linux and FreeBSD do not have alignme
On 5/6/11 7:03 AM, Robert Simmons wrote:
On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:40:22 AM Matthias Apitz wrote:
# gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
# gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
# gpart create -s bsd ad4s1 # Init with a BSD
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 3:35 AM, wrote:
> Robert Simmons wrote:>
>> > How do I wipe the whole thing in one go so that I can start
>> > afresh?
>> >
>> > gpart destroy ad4 ??
>>
>> Yes, but first you must delete all of the slices/partitions.
>> Think of it this way: you must go backwards down the
Robert Simmons wrote:
> > How do I wipe the whole thing in one go so that I can start
> > afresh?
> >
> > gpart destroy ad4 ??
>
> Yes, but first you must delete all of the slices/partitions.
> Think of it this way: you must go backwards down the path you
> just came with a delete for each add, t
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 08:03, Robert Simmons wrote:
>> On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:40:22 AM Matthias Apitz wrote:
>> > Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
>> > following sequence:
>> >
>> > # gpart c
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 08:03, Robert Simmons wrote:
> On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:40:22 AM Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
> > following sequence:
> >
> > # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
> > #
On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:59:44 AM Polytropon wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 06:40:22 +0200, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
> > following sequence:
> >
> > # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
> >
On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:40:22 AM Matthias Apitz wrote:
> Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
> following sequence:
>
> # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
> # gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 06:40:22 +0200, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
> following sequence:
>
> # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
> # gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
itions, you will need a freebsd-boot
> > partition with the proper bootcode for what you want to do. If you
> > search this mailing list's archive, I've posted basic instructions for
> > gpart/GPT partitioning recently, perhaps there needs to be a section
> > added
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Warren Block wrote:
> There's a sample in the second half of my disk setup article:
>
> http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html
Looks good. I have a few critiques:
1) Linux and FreeBSD do not have alignment requirements, as far as I
know. So you
x27;s archive, I've posted basic instructions for
gpart/GPT partitioning recently, perhaps there needs to be a section
added to Handbook 18.3.2 describing the basics. Unfortunately, the
only mention in the handbook is a link to the man page in section
18.3.
There's a sample in the second
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Erik Nørgaard wrote:
> I just realized how many years ago I haven't been partitioning any disks ..
> this system is so stable :) So, now I see I have gpart as alternative to
> fdisk/bsdlabel.
gpart(8) from my experience is far superior to all t
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Erik Nørgaard wrote:
> - or any problems (problems as in I've never tried that before) - using
> gpart instead of the "old" scheme?
Sorry for the double post, but the only problem that I've encountered
is after creating a encrypted provider with geli(8), that provi
Hi:
I just realized how many years ago I haven't been partitioning any disks
.. this system is so stable :) So, now I see I have gpart as alternative
to fdisk/bsdlabel.
I have a 320GB disk which will be dedicated to FBSD, is there any
advantage - or any problems (problems as in I
> I think you may be agonizing to much. You would have to to seriously bad
> to make it slow and even then its a relative thing.
>
> Giving it 4GB ZIL, 8 GB swap, and 28 gb l2arc will make it rapid and cover
> you for most things. Putting the swap on the 250 gig drive wont make much
> difference t
x.)
>
> The boot sector doesn't really matter as much; if I go with a dedicated
> swap partition that will probably also hold the boot sector. Otherwise, I'm
> leaning towards the SSD, as I'm already planning on partitioning that, and
> I'm less likely to pull it o
swap, as I have a fair amount
of RAM. (And I don't care about crash dumps on this box.)
The boot sector doesn't really matter as much; if I go with a dedicated
swap partition that will probably also hold the boot sector. Otherwise,
I'm leaning towards the SSD, as I'm alr
So I've hot a 60GB 2.5" IDE Hard Drive in a USB Enclosure. Thing works like
a champ, even in FreeBSD. I'm curious the best (or most efficient?) way to
cut the drive up. My Goal is to have a bootable slice (5ish GB for the
latest stable DVD), some free space if I need to write to a location
reliably
binE6c8fkIE6U.bin
Description: Binary data
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Some points - I've done most of these...
1. Grub can boot from a secondary partition (my current laptop has a
recovery partition in 1, vista (b) in 2, fbsd in 3, and linux in 4
as 2 secondary partitions.) works fine. Grub doesn't boot vista
correctly, but handles bsd fine and (of course)
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:17:47PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:30:43 -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 11:45:07AM -0700, Michael David Crawford wrote:
> > FreeBSD is not happy with MS 'extended partitions'. But, I don't really
> > see your problem.
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:30:43 -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 11:45:07AM -0700, Michael David Crawford wrote:
> FreeBSD is not happy with MS 'extended partitions'. But, I don't really
> see your problem. You are not using Microsloth for anything.
That's why I'm not sur
ill...@gmail.com skrev:
2009/4/26 Jorg Andersson :
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 03:45:33PM -0600, Tim Judd wrote:
I don't recall FreeBSD supporting extended partitions... at all
I remember reading they aren't in /dev/ but still is mountable. Is this
still the case?
They show up just fine here (8-
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 11:45:07AM -0700, Michael David Crawford wrote:
> I have a machine I plan to use solely for testing. I have FreeBSD
> 8.0-CURRENT on it right now, and would like to add FreeBSD 7.2-RC2 as
> well as CentOS 5.3 Linux.
>
> Presently I have three Master Boot Record primary
2009/4/26 Jorg Andersson :
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 03:45:33PM -0600, Tim Judd wrote:
>> I don't recall FreeBSD supporting extended partitions... at all
>
> I remember reading they aren't in /dev/ but still is mountable. Is this
> still the case?
They show up just fine here (8-current),
and I am
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 03:45:33PM -0600, Tim Judd wrote:
> I don't recall FreeBSD supporting extended partitions... at all
I remember reading they aren't in /dev/ but still is mountable. Is this
still the case?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Michael David Crawford wrote:
> I have a machine I plan to use solely for testing. I have FreeBSD
> 8.0-CURRENT on it right now, and would like to add FreeBSD 7.2-RC2 as well
> as CentOS 5.3 Linux.
>
> Presently I have three Master Boot Record primary partitions
2009/4/26 Michael David Crawford :
> I have a machine I plan to use solely for testing. I have FreeBSD
> 8.0-CURRENT on it right now, and would like to add FreeBSD 7.2-RC2 as well
> as CentOS 5.3 Linux.
>
> Presently I have three Master Boot Record primary partitions - "slices" in
> the FreeBSD pa
I have a machine I plan to use solely for testing. I have FreeBSD
8.0-CURRENT on it right now, and would like to add FreeBSD 7.2-RC2 as
well as CentOS 5.3 Linux.
Presently I have three Master Boot Record primary partitions - "slices"
in the FreeBSD parlance, if I understand correctly:
- A L
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 09:16:00AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >
> >AFAIK the "danger" is that someone boots the machine with an
> >installer for some other OS, and that installer treats the
> >disk as unformatted -- hence "obviously" containing nothing
> >important -- because it doesn't have
On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 11:28:32PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Dangerous is probably overstating the issue a bit ...
>
> AFAIK the "danger" is that someone boots the machine with an
> installer for some other OS, and that installer treats the
> disk as unformatted -- hence "obviously" con
AFAIK the "danger" is that someone boots the machine with an
installer for some other OS, and that installer treats the
disk as unformatted -- hence "obviously" containing nothing
important -- because it doesn't have a recognizable MBR.
some people rarely boot other OS :)
__
> Dangerous is probably overstating the issue a bit ...
AFAIK the "danger" is that someone boots the machine with an
installer for some other OS, and that installer treats the
disk as unformatted -- hence "obviously" containing nothing
important -- because it doesn't have a recognizable MBR.
_
;t remember the last time I used anything else.
> > >
> > > So you've never booted from a disk that has been partitioned as a file
> > > system?
> >
> > You are getting your terms scrambled here.
> > Partitioning has nothing directly to do with cr
nose in here- I just have a couple of questions.
> > > >
> > > > 1) It IS possible to boot from a dedicated disk?
> > >
> > > Yes. Can't remember the last time I used anything else.
> >
> > So you've never booted from a disk that has been parti
I have never booted a FreeBSD system from a disk which
contained any other operating system.
I have only used "dangerously dadicated" mode for FreeBSD,
except when sysinstall made selecting/implementing that too much
work.
almost like me except i don't use sysinstall, and manually
om a dedicated disk?
> >
> > Yes. Can't remember the last time I used anything else.
>
> So you've never booted from a disk that has been partitioned as a file
> system?
You are getting your terms scrambled here.
Partitioning has nothing directly to do with creat
k and all the
> > rest in either the a or d partitions mounted as something
> > like '/work' or /scratch'.
> >
> > >
> > > ad0 |---| the whole disk
> > > ad0s1 \
Da Rock writes:
> > > Excuse my nose in here- I just have a couple of questions.
> > >
> > > 1) It IS possible to boot from a dedicated disk?
> >
> >Yes. Can't remember the last time I used anything else.
>
> So you've never booted from a disk that has been partitioned as a file
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 20:55 -0500, Robert Huff wrote:
> Da Rock writes:
>
> > Excuse my nose in here- I just have a couple of questions.
> >
> > 1) It IS possible to boot from a dedicated disk?
>
> Yes. Can't remember the last time I used anything else.
So you've never booted from a
Da Rock writes:
> Excuse my nose in here- I just have a couple of questions.
>
> 1) It IS possible to boot from a dedicated disk?
Yes. Can't remember the last time I used anything else.
> 2) Does using dedicated mode increase the space available to use?
> P
1 - 100 of 239 matches
Mail list logo
