From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 12 00:56:26 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A5D16A4CE for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:56:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0037543F3F for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:56:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hAC8uEtB032964; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:56:20 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) To: Bruce Evans From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 08 Nov 2003 19:35:16 +1100." <20031108191433.J608@gamplex.bde.org> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:56:14 +0100 Message-ID: <32963.1068627374@critter.freebsd.dk> cc: arch@freebsd.org cc: Kirk McKusick Subject: Re: newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:56:26 -0000 In message <20031108191433.J608@gamplex.bde.org>, Bruce Evans writes: >I don't use GEOM, so the label won't be going away for me. Anyway, there >is no dependency (the label is just one of the things that one might >examine to recover a crashed disk), and any overaul by GEOM would have >to duplicate the functionality of storing metadata about the superblocks >somewhere outside the superblocks. This is a very good example of where it is important to get your terminology straight: No sane "overhaul by GEOM" would implement this in GEOM. It could be hacked into various existing classes or even done cleanly in its own class which is almost as silly. > (I actually store metadata about file >systems in (backups of) disk files in /var/backups. Normal backups >provide inadequate backups of metadata.) This is probably a much better idea than anything you said until now on the subject. It might not be a bad idea to store the relevant magics in a /etc/ufs.conf file, but there are some details about device vs. media/filesystem identification in particular in context of dynanic devices to that must be worked out. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.