Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:20:12 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Peter Steele <psteele@maxiscale.com>, "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Should root partition be first partition? Message-ID: <p06240801c797733a33db@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <7B9397B189EB6E46A5EE7B4C8A4BB7CB383B25CD@MBX03.exg5.exghost.com> References: <7B9397B189EB6E46A5EE7B4C8A4BB7CB383B25CD@MBX03.exg5.exghost.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 8:09 AM -0600 2/8/10, Peter Steele wrote: >I've set up a system with gpart and have the swap partition first >followed by root, var, and so on. This works fine but I've seen >documents that always have root first, then swap. Is there any >reason that root should be the first partition or can it follow swap >space? In the world of MBR partitioning, there is some situation where it's important that the root partition be 'a'. Unfortunately, I don't remember what it was. Probably something having to do with the boot loader. I do remember running into it once when I had the root partition as 'd' by mistake. But that was several years ago, so I don't remember the details. In any case, I would not expect the same problems to come up once you're using gpart partitioning. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06240801c797733a33db>