*BSD News Article 12665


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!uuneo!sugar!peter
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Disklabel help needed
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 18:39:11 GMT
Message-ID: <C3w6HC.9Eo@sugar.neosoft.com>
References: <C3Lyuz.A4y@BitBlocks.com> <C3MwC4.ALy@sugar.neosoft.com> <C3uEzo.1J0@BitBlocks.com>
Lines: 28

In article <C3uEzo.1J0@BitBlocks.com> bvs@BitBlocks.com (Bakul Shah) writes:
> peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >The other part of my comment was that it would be desirable to make this
> >a standard part of the system installation, so tools that want to play
> >with the bootstrap can have a fixed, known partition to work with rather
> >than having to know that wd0a or wd0b or whatever is first.

> I'd rather be able to boot from *any* partition so that I can
> boot even if one copy is trashed.

I don't see how that has any bearing whatsoever on anything I said. I'm
talking about "a place to put the boot blocks, volume label, partition
table, and so on". Nothing to do with where the kernel is.

> The other problem with a separate
> boot partition is that Unix tools like to have cylinder aligned
> partitions and making a 1 sector `cylinder' for scsi disks (as
> you suggested in another post) will break a few other things.

How? If the program sees a 1 sector "cylinder" and it breaks it's
probably in need of fixing anyway. Any other cylinder size is going to
be meaningless even in the short term, with more and more zone-formatted
disks and disks doing weird mapping on the drive itself.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   Oletko halannut suttasi tänään?
  'U`    
Tarjoilija, tämä ateria elää vielä.