From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 18 10:41:44 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 061CC1065676; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:41:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nyan@jp.FreeBSD.org) Received: from sakura.ccs.furiru.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:2f0:104:8060::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C8F48FC24; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:41:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nyan@jp.FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (authenticated bits=0) by sakura.ccs.furiru.org (unknown) with ESMTP id mBIAfbaH023133; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:41:40 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from nyan@jp.FreeBSD.org) Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:41:37 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20081218.194137.191463900.nyan@jp.FreeBSD.org> To: marcel@FreeBSD.org From: Takahashi Yoshihiro In-Reply-To: <200812171743.mBHHhMd3010561@svn.freebsd.org> <20080927.213040.27797529.nyan@jp.FreeBSD.org> References: <200812171743.mBHHhMd3010561@svn.freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.1 on Emacs 22.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: gpart (Re: svn commit: r186240 - in head/sys: amd64/conf arm/conf i386/conf mips/conf pc98/conf sparc64/conf sun4v/conf) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:41:44 -0000 In article <200812171743.mBHHhMd3010561@svn.freebsd.org> Marcel Moolenaar writes: > Log: > Make gpart the default partitioning class on all platforms. > Both ia64 and powerpc were using gpart exclusively already > so there's no change for those two. It still remains some problems that I reported months ago. > 1. A disklabel checking in g_part_bsd_read() is failed. > 2. g_part_pc98_dumpconf() does not print a slice name. > 3. g_part_pc98_probe() is too strict. > 4. It's failed to recognize a big SCSI disk as BSD slice. > 5. A (bit strange) FAT slice is recoginized as BSD slice. (1) and (2) are fixed, but (3), (4) and (5) are not. BTW, I think that (5) is not pc98 specific problem. --- TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro