Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:01:05 -0600 From: Robert Noland <rnoland@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexander Best <alexbestms@math.uni-muenster.de> Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Paul G Webster <mailinglists@alchemy-networks.co.uk>, Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> Subject: Re: 8.0-RC2 mangles msdosfs Message-ID: <1257271265.18564.0.camel@balrog.2hip.net> In-Reply-To: <permail-2009110317462380e26a0b00007a25-a_best01@message-id.uni-muenster.de> References: <permail-2009110317462380e26a0b00007a25-a_best01@message-id.uni-muenster.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 18:46 +0100, Alexander Best wrote: > Paul G Webster schrieb am 2009-11-03: > > As an example, this is a 1GB fat32 disk. > > > > da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0 > > da0: <LG USB Drive 1100> Removable Direct Access SCSI-0 device > > da0: 1.000MB/s transfers > > da0: 956MB (1957888 512 byte sectors: 64H 32S/T 956C) > > desktop1# ls /dev | grep da0~ > > desktop1# ls /dev | grep da0 > > da0 > > desktop1# fdisk /dev/da0 > > ******* Working on device /dev/da0 ******* > > parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are: > > cylinders=956 heads=64 sectors/track=32 (2048 blks/cyl) > > > parameters to be used for BIOS calculations are: > > cylinders=956 heads=64 sectors/track=32 (2048 blks/cyl) > > > Media sector size is 512 > > Warning: BIOS sector numbering starts with sector 1 > > Information from DOS bootblock is: > > The data for partition 1 is: > > sysid 114 (0x72),(unknown) > > start 778135908, size 1141509631 (557377 Meg), flag 6f > > beg: cyl 357/ head 116/ sector 40; > > end: cyl 357/ head 32/ sector 45 > > The data for partition 2 is: > > sysid 101 (0x65),(Novell Netware/386 3.xx) > > start 168689522, size 1936028240 (945326 Meg), flag 69 > > beg: cyl 288/ head 115/ sector 43; > > end: cyl 367/ head 114/ sector 50 > > The data for partition 3 is: > > sysid 121 (0x79),(QNX4.x 3rd part) > > start 1869881465, size 1936028192 (945326 Meg), flag 73 > > beg: cyl 366/ head 32/ sector 33; > > end: cyl 357/ head 32/ sector 43 > > The data for partition 4 is: > > sysid 13 (0x0d),(unknown) > > start 0, size 3637226496 (1775989 Meg), flag 74 > > beg: cyl 372/ head 97/ sector 50; > > end: cyl 0/ head 10/ sector 0 > > desktop1# > > *lol* just tried this myself and my fdisk output looks just as bad as yours: > > ******* Working on device da0 ******* > parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are: > cylinders=242 heads=255 sectors/track=63 (16065 blks/cyl) > > parameters to be used for BIOS calculations are: > cylinders=242 heads=255 sectors/track=63 (16065 blks/cyl) > > Media sector size is 512 > Warning: BIOS sector numbering starts with sector 1 > Information from DOS bootblock is: > The data for partition 1 is: > sysid 110 (0x6e),(unknown) > start 1768187213, size 1701211749 (830669 Meg), flag 65 > beg: cyl 357/ head 114/ sector 46; > end: cyl 10/ head 255/ sector 13 > The data for partition 2 is: > sysid 255 (0xff),(Xenix bad blocks table) > start 1953723749, size 980709985 (478862 Meg), flag 68 > beg: cyl 370/ head 108/ sector 37; > end: cyl 78/ head 13/ sector 10 > The data for partition 3 is: > sysid 116 (0x74),(unknown) > start 1801683314, size 168652389 (82349 Meg), flag 20 > beg: cyl 371/ head 84/ sector 33; > end: cyl 100/ head 101/ sector 32 > The data for partition 4 is: > sysid 0 (0000),(unused) > start 2885681152, size 54212 (26 Meg), flag 0 > beg: cyl 0/ head 0/ sector 0; > end: cyl 0/ head 0/ sector 0 > > `file -s /dev/da0` reports: > > /dev/da0: x86 boot sector, Microsoft Windows XP Bootloader (4.german) NTLDR, > code offset 0x58, OEM-ID "MSDOS5.0", sectors/cluster 8, reserved sectors 38, > Media descriptor 0xf8, heads 255, sectors 3903487 (volumes > 32 MB) , FAT (32 > bit), sectors/FAT 3805, serial number 0x88e88370, unlabeled > > `fdisk` in general seems to need some updates. this is the output if i call > `fdisk` without any args: The important question is what does "gpart show" say about these disks.... robert. > fdisk: mounted root fs resource doesn't match expectations (regexec returned > 1) > > alex > > > On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:28:10 -0000, Mark Linimon > > <linimon@lonesome.com> wrote: > > > >On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:03:29AM +0100, Alexander Best wrote: > > >>i guess the freebsd-fs@ guys know about these problems but don't > > >>have > > >>the time to deal with it. most of them are probably working on > > >>zfs. > > > >AFAIK there are only a handful of people working on ZFS. > > > >We certainly need more people willing to work on filesystems code. > > >In > > >general it does have a large learning curve, so it's not as > > >attractive > > >as some of the other areas. That's probably why, as the kernel has > > >undergone radical changes (e.g. for SMP) over time, that some of the > > >fs code has not kept up. > > > >mcl > > >_______________________________________________ > > >freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > >To unsubscribe, send any mail to > > >"freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > > -- > > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Robert Noland <rnoland@FreeBSD.org> FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1257271265.18564.0.camel>