Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 09:43:42 +0100 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Partition naming [Was: Adding Hard Drives - Prepping] Message-ID: <Mutt.19970117094342.j@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199701170014.TAA17309@kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu>; from Joel Ray Holveck on Jan 16, 1997 19:14:56 -0500 References: <Mutt.19970115100101.j@uriah.heep.sax.de> <199701170014.TAA17309@kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Joel Ray Holveck wrote: > > Sadly, yes. I wonder how they kept congruency with Solaris/Sparc. > > Did they add an fdisk table to the latter, in order to keep the same > > terminology? :) > > No, they added an fdisk table to the x86. Yes, and by this, they changed the use of the term `partition' from their native partitions to the fdisk ones, so they also had to change the name of their native partitions to `slice'. Now their terminology does no longer match the Sparc version. We didn't change terms, but added the term `slice' for the fdisk-table units. Now we are consistent with the BSD tradition, but inconsistent with some other operating systems on the x86 platform. Needless to say, there's no way to ``do the right thing'' here. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Mutt.19970117094342.j>