*BSD News Article 12381


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!torn!utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!sifon!storm
From: storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc Wandschneider)
Subject: Re: Disklabel/newfs -
Message-ID: <1993Mar5.161923.22895@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca>
Sender: news@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca
Nntp-Posting-Host: binkley.cs.mcgill.ca
Organization: School of Computer Science, McGill University
References: <1993Mar4.062419.18727@oz.plymouth.edu> <1993Mar4.172411.28968@coe.montana.edu> <CGD.93Mar4205238@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 16:19:23 GMT
Lines: 29

In article <CGD.93Mar4205238@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU> cgd@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Chris G. Demetriou) writes:
>In article <1993Mar4.172411.28968@coe.montana.edu> osyjm@cs.montana.edu (Jaye Mathisen) writes:
>>I have had nothing but grief whenever my disktab doesn't have d and
>>c partitions defined.  As soon as I defined them, voila'.
>
>"normal" bsd stuff uses the c partition to access the "whole disk" --
>disklabel needs this.
>
>386bsd also (<thwack!>) needs a d partition, something to do with DOS
>stuff...  (i guess "d" is supposed to be the "whole disk" and "c"
>is "the whole part of the disk allocated to 386bsd".)

	Is this true...?

	I have a 170MB SCSI as my second disk, with only a and c partitions,
both of which take up the whole drive. 

	Everything works great.

	Should I start worrying..?

	ToodlepiP!
	Marc 'em.

-- 
  storm@cs.mcgill.ca           McGill P.O.W Camp         "Oh crap---It's not
  Marc Wandschneider           Montreal, CANADA             random enough"
	Any opinions expressed are not mine, but those of the Demon Lord
      Yeegeheeegenogohugu who possessed me whilst I munched on Raisin Bran.