Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:21:20 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: FreeBSD Filter <freebsd@KIWI-Computer.com> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removal of Disklabel (was: Re: Dangerously Dedicated) Message-ID: <20001120112120.A10354@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <200011201852.MAA49580@KIWI-Computer.com>; from freebsd@KIWI-Computer.com on Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 12:52:46PM -0600 References: <14873.28040.451463.172207@nomad.yogotech.com> <200011201852.MAA49580@KIWI-Computer.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 12:52:46PM -0600, FreeBSD Filter wrote:
> 2). existing installations would not be affected, only new installations
> would "renumber" the slices-- we would have to provide functionality in
> dealing with the current labels as well as the "true slices" including
> extended. The transition would be painless.
Thus you must keep all the current bits for doing this in the kernel, etc
al for compat reasons. Yuck. We don't need YET another way of doing
things. Just look at all the crap in the i386 locore.s for all the
various ways of getting the boot info (see recover_bootinfo, etc). Now
compare to the Alpha. The Alpha has a single way. Thus the code is
cleaner and much more maintainable as there is no backwards compatibility
that must be maintained.
We have a working way, lets not obfuscate things by having YET another
way.
> 3). New installations would use the new numbering scheme and would use true
> "DOS partitions" (BSD slices), thus remaining completely compatible with
^^^
They aren't "[ms-]DOS", they aren't "M$", they are IBM/PC or BIOS partitions.
--
-- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001120112120.A10354>