From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 25 13:24:12 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2CF1065674 for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 13:24:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gpalmer@freebsd.org) Received: from noop.in-addr.com (mail.in-addr.com [IPv6:2001:470:8:162::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C918FC08 for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 13:24:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gjp by noop.in-addr.com with local (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QlL8j-000AgX-Hc; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:24:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:24:09 -0400 From: Gary Palmer To: Chuck Swiger Message-ID: <20110725132409.GA1339@in-addr.com> References: <20110718234124.GA5626@icarus.home.lan> <20110719211039.GA16085@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <02D367A5-CA74-4E8A-BE3E-F81485B287A7@mac.com> <4e26a250.iKKzhkOLoTB3sdOr%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <20110720031431.GA33758@icarus.home.lan> <84CC369B-4E70-414C-8C57-5FE772C7134F@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84CC369B-4E70-414C-8C57-5FE772C7134F@mac.com> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gpalmer@freebsd.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on noop.in-addr.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of support for 4KB disk sectors X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 13:24:12 -0000 On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 08:48:54PM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Jul 19, 2011, at 8:14 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 02:39:28AM -0700, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > >> IIRC, Plextor (and maybe some others) had a switch to select 512 or > >> 2048 as the default transfer size, precisely so that they could be > >> used as boot devices with systems that supported only 512. > > Come to think of it, I do remember that switch, yes. > > Do you happen to know whether this limitation was part of the Sun hardware, > or of SunOS? CMU had a lot of Sun3 machines and NeXT clusters, so I ended > up mixing NeXT CD-ROM and the Canon? magneto-optical drives with Sun H/W, > and vice versa. My memory is a bit fuzzy but I beleive it is at least partly because they used ufs on the CDs rather than ISO 9660 based filesystems so they could boot from the CD and have the device nodes there as well as all the other features a ufs filesystem supports but ISO 9660 doesn't. Gary