From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Nov 20 19:02:38 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id TAA15074
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 19:02:38 -0800
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id TAA15054
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 19:02:31 -0800
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id TAA12703; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 19:01:52 -0800
Message-Id: <199511210301.TAA12703@rah.star-gate.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.2 7/18/95
To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
cc: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.de>, FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Adding New Hard Drives: A Major Complaint 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 20 Nov 1995 15:01:55 EST."
             <Pine.BSF.3.91.951120150007.1247B-100000@hub.org> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 19:01:46 -0800
From: "Amancio Hasty Jr." <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>>> "Marc G. Fournier" said:
 > On Mon, 20 Nov 1995, Greg Lehey wrote:
 > 
 > > Marc G. Fournier writes:
 > > > 
 > > > 	Actually, the user interface itself is perfect, if it wasn't
 > > > hidden inside the Installation interface, and required you to commit
 > > > to an install in order for it to add your drive...
 > > 
 > > Yes, that's the way I'd do it too.  It doesn't seem to be too much
 > > trouble to tear the disk stuff out and make a standalone program that
 > > didn't also try to install software on it.
 > >  
 > > > 	...and, as to "what everybody else is using"...as you mention
 > > > below...how many ppl know about the "wizard" mode that is in 2.0.5's
 > > > sysinstall?  I found out about it in IRC last night, chatting with 
 > > > Gary and a few others...
 > > 
 > > Well, I still don't know what it is.  Anybody care to tell us, or do
 > > you have to be a wizard for that?
 > 
 > 	Since its not required in 2.1, its kind of useless to advertise
 > the feature.  The main problem...it basically puts you into "raw" mode
 > in relation to your drive, so, if, like with fdisk/disklabel, you really
 > know what you are doing with your drive, then you are fine...but if that
 > is the case, fdisk/disklabel will work for you too :)
 
fdisk/disklabel Pretty lame if you ask me -- perhaps we should required
FreeBSD to be booted by  IBM Punch Cards....

	Amancio