Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 04:55:23 +0930 From: Matt Thyer <matt.thyer@gmail.com> To: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> 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: <CACM2%2B-5DGpYZO-D37NPY3S4Ldd_O1kU5D4rYt==YCqh1Ero79A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4E5FD76C.5080304@freebsd.org> 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> <4E5FD76C.5080304@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 2, 2011 4:35 AM, "Nathan Whitehorn" <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> wrote: > > 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 A hack to transparently ignore GPT partition problems on the install media might be required. Or else a utility to fix the memstick partition table.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACM2%2B-5DGpYZO-D37NPY3S4Ldd_O1kU5D4rYt==YCqh1Ero79A>