From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 10 08:19:31 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4358106566C for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:19:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx01.qsc.de (mx01.qsc.de [213.148.129.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A248FC19 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:19:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r55.edvax.de (port-92-195-228-22.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.228.22]) by mx01.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FA923CC75; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:19:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from r55.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r55.edvax.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id nBA8JR5v005760; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:19:28 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:19:27 +0100 From: Polytropon To: James Phillips Message-Id: <20091210091927.680e91e2.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <291716.23061.qm@web65514.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <20091210043133.3AF5110656DC@hub.freebsd.org> <291716.23061.qm@web65514.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dangerously Dedicated X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:19:31 -0000 On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:04:28 -0800 (PST), James Phillips wrote: > The Detailed 8.0 release notes don't say anything about bootability: > 2.2.5 File Systems > “dangerously dedicated” mode for the UFS file system > is no longer supported > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/relnotes-detailed.html Okay, but what happens when you # newfs /dev/ad1 in the assumption that ad1 will be a pure data disk, and issuing this command will create a partition covering the whole ad1 disk without any slice, and then create an UFS file system in this partition? I cannot imagine that this shouldn't be possible anymore. I'm convinced that abandoning DD for bootable disks is completely understandable, but... Where are the points when problem occur? (I've got no 8.0 installation at hand so I can't check this in a live setting.) > I also note that the DOS partition (slice) table is not explictly > required either: could you use an Apple partiton (slice) table > instead? I don't know how they differ from each other. > Of course, if you are just storing raw data, you don't always *need* > a filesystem. You can of course simply use tar (as the "most universal file system, at least among UNIXes") on a raw disk, e. g. tar cf /lots/of/files /dev/ad1 and retrieve it using tar xf /dev/ad1 But in the common case of a pure data disk, as I mentioned it above, you have a file system (inside a partition), but no slice. In such a case, the fdisk utility will show a sysid 165 partition for the disk, just as if a slice would be present. I'm interested in knowing where this will end. FreeBSD defaulting to FAT file system for maximum compatibility? Don't mind, just a joke. It will of course use NTFS. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...