Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:05:16 -0500
From:      Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>
To:        Matt Thyer <matt.thyer@gmail.com>
Cc:        Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>, Jason Campbell <jason.lee.campbell@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Problems booting 9.0-BETA1 memstick
Message-ID:  <4E5FD76C.5080304@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACM2%2B-4aU8VqaaKQnAXszFsU-097NLqHGdJP_u5LnbBWVoVtng@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAMG0UAh1=Jy_eD5t%2BV_MkhVJrMFoe-OQQFgut1USr6v9CWMj4A@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1108302109370.49311@wonkity.com> <CACM2%2B-4aU8VqaaKQnAXszFsU-097NLqHGdJP_u5LnbBWVoVtng@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 09/01/11 14:00, Matt Thyer wrote:
> Shouldn't we use MBR partitioning instead of GPT for the memstick image ?
>
> We won't need larger than 2TiB installation media for many decades!

It uses GPT so that the partition can be labeled, and fstab will not 
need e.g. da0 hard-coded into it. makefs, which builds the filesystem, 
does not support UFS labels.
-Nathan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E5FD76C.5080304>