*BSD News Article 12433


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!pacbell.com!amdahl!amdcad!BitBlocks.com!bvs
From: bvs@BitBlocks.com (Bakul Shah)
Subject: Re: Disklabel help needed
Message-ID: <C3Lyuz.A4y@BitBlocks.com>
Organization: Bit Blocks, Inc.
References: <1993Mar5.020610.29203@tfs.com> <C3Gp2w.7D4@sugar.neosoft.com> <C3J9FL.4vJ@BitBlocks.com> <C3KKLq.1vH@sugar.neosoft.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 06:18:34 GMT
Lines: 23

peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

>In article <C3J9FL.4vJ@BitBlocks.com> bvs@BitBlocks.com (Bakul Shah) writes:
>> peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>> > OK, folks, THIS is something that *needs* to be fixed, and that *can* be
>> > easily fixed at the application level... I hope.

>> This can't be fixed at the application level but I wouldn't worry
>> about it.

>I'm not worried about it, but why can't you simply define a small boot
>partition at the beginning of the disk? That would be an application level
>fix, and it would provide a better (more secure) hook to hang programs that
>muck with the FS and boot on.

Yes, you can define a small partition at the beginning of the
disk but then your swap partition is not the *first* partition
(it is second or later)!  If your swap partition is not the first
one, there is no need to fix anything.  If you want it to be
*first*, you have to fix the swap code or lie to disklabel &
other programs about where your disk starts.

Bakul Shah <bvs@BitBlocks.com>