From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 29 04:25:23 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7549016A4CE for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 04:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from srv1.cosmo-project.de (srv1.cosmo-project.de [213.83.6.106]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD77843D31 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 04:24:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: from cicely5.cicely.de (cicely5.cicely.de [IPv6:3ffe:400:8d0:301:200:92ff:fe9b:20e7]) (authenticated bits=0) i3TBOqDv082166 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:24:55 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: from cicely12.cicely.de (cicely12.cicely.de [IPv6:3ffe:400:8d0:301::12]) by cicely5.cicely.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3TBMBUi038103 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:23:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: from cicely12.cicely.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cicely12.cicely.de (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i3TBK7we009931; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:20:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: (from ticso@localhost) by cicely12.cicely.de (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i3TBHQ4w009915; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:17:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso) Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:17:26 +0200 From: Bernd Walter To: Nikos Ntarmos Message-ID: <20040429111725.GP64306@cicely12.cicely.de> References: <200404270906.54407.current@schmalzbauer.de> <20040428012657.GA7257@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <408F11C5.5030403@freebsd.org> <20040428204931.GA72739@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040428210315.GA27365@diogenis.ceid.upatras.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040428210315.GA27365@diogenis.ceid.upatras.gr> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD cicely12.cicely.de 5.2-CURRENT alpha User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.61 X-Spam-Report: * -4.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.61 (1.212.2.1-2003-12-09-exp) on cicely5.cicely.de cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Default support for GPT [was: Re: More than 8 labels per slice] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: ticso@cicely.de List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:25:23 -0000 On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 12:03:15AM +0300, Nikos Ntarmos wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 01:49:31PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 08:07:01PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > > > I remember there being rumors a year or two ago about > > > Intel trying to sack legacy BIOS and MBR support on x86 entirely > > > and force everyone to use EFI and GPT. > > > > AMD doesn't have this desire, so please don't assume this for the new > > AMD64 platform. > > I wonder in what way will SRM fail with an EFI/GPT-only partition > table... :) SRM doesn't know about partitions itself. Either the table location collides with the SRM bootblocks or its just that our boot software doesn't know about it. -- B.Walter BWCT http://www.bwct.de bernd@bwct.de info@bwct.de