Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 13:27:24 -0700 From: "Dharma Wolford" <bsd.talk@gmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: HDD partitioning question... Message-ID: <aa7308b80804141327v7c6d0ff1i62fcc528a9e33318@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi folks, (I'm a relative newcomer to all this... thanks for your patience & help.) I've installed FreeBSD 6.2 on a system that will be primarily used as an FTP server. It has 2 drives - one for the OS and the other for the FTP storage. My question is about the storage drive in this case. You can see how I have things partitioned right now: ################################# [root@mybox /var/log]# mount /dev/da0s1a on / (ufs, local) devfs on /dev (devfs, local) /dev/da0s1d on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/da0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/da0s1e on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/da1 on /usr/home (ufs, local, soft-updates) [root@mybox /var/log]# ################################# I started by trying to use fdisk to partition the storage drive (/dev/da1) but was getting errors which I don't exactly recall - something about a problem with the 'block device'. Anyway, then I wound up using the command "newfs -O 2 /dev/da1" which seemed to work and I was then able to mount and use the drive. My question is: is there anything wrong with having "/dev/da1" mounted an in-use? Should I have created a partition like "/dev/da1s1a" or something? I seem to remember somebody once chiding me for having formatted or mounted the 'block device' itself instead of a partition... is this making any sense to anyone? Clearly I need to know more about *NIX file systems (slices, partitions, block devices) and best practices or some such - I am working on it but obviously have a ways to go! Thanks very much! dharma
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?aa7308b80804141327v7c6d0ff1i62fcc528a9e33318>