Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:19:27 +0100 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: James Phillips <anti_spam256@yahoo.ca> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dangerously Dedicated 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:04:28 -0800 (PST), James Phillips <anti_spam256@yahoo.ca> 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, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091210091927.680e91e2.freebsd>