Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 22:22:11 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Robert Simmons <rsimmons0@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: dangerously dedicated physical disks. Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1309232214440.40222@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BQLa9ApMU7VfxcNOCDyN=-T8FT_5RjDrTU6hETuMqWidRJQDA@mail.gmail.com> References: <op.w3tl5faxe4gg2u@localhost> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1309220754410.27172@wonkity.com> <20130923122512.a9b91aae.freebsd@edvax.de> <CA%2BQLa9ApMU7VfxcNOCDyN=-T8FT_5RjDrTU6hETuMqWidRJQDA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Robert Simmons wrote: > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:25 AM, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote: >>> With GPT, there is no reason to use BSD disklabels at all. >> >> And most modern computers do not have any problem booting it. >> The old MBR approach (as well as dedicated) will probably only >> be needed in niche applications and exceptions. You can have >> all the advantages of "being easy stuff" known from dedicated >> layout by using the GPT tools, plus you gain "more compatibility" >> if this matters. > > Not entirely. Due to GEOM specs, if you create a GELI encrypted > container, you cannot use GPT partitioning inside that container. You > must use BSD. This is an edge case, and I've submitted a bug about it > a while ago, but like I just said, this is apparently a feature not a > bug. It's not GEOM, it's just GPT. By specification, the backup partition table has to be at the end of the disk. That interferes with anything else that wants to put metadata there, like GELI or gmirror.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1309232214440.40222>