Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 14:11:56 +1100 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@lambert.org Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: fdisk and partition info Message-ID: <199603300311.OAA22757@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>You have lucked out, then. The factory defaults from AT&T/NCR are >"sparing enabled". Mostly because the original SVR4 code's soft >bad sectoring sucked. 8-(. Mine seems to have come from the WD factory :-). The Installation Guide says "[WD1007V-SE1/SE2 ... Copyright 1989 WDC ... Part No. 79-000367-000 WD0027S 8/89]". >> I don't see any such assumption. I have 3 SCSI controllers: U34F, >> BT445C and SC200. I've only used the U34F with 64/32 geometry. >> The BT445C and the SC200 work with assorted drives in assorted >> translation modes giving 64/32, 128/32 and 255/63 geometries. >What happens if you turn of translation on the things? (yes, I >know this is not a possibility for Adaptec). I haven't tried it. It should fail iff the weaker translation mode can't handle the geometry that the partition table was configured for. Perhaps if the geometry isn't 64/32. >... >> >Right... that's why you would use directories for population. >> >> Try explaining it to a user who thinks he has one disk. >How does the same user deal with having a "C:" and "D:" drive on his >DOS box with one disk without going into mental-meltdown? They've had 14 years to get used to it :-). The drive letters are visible at all levels because there's no mount step to produce a seamless directory tree, so users have to get used to it (SUBST and JOIN are little used and don't work well). >He handles it because there's a front-end program and he doesn't >have to deal with devices at the INT 13 device ID level. This program is called `export EDITOR=your_favourite_editor; disklabel -e' in BSD. It provides the same amount of support for DOS drives as DOS fdisk does for BSD partitions (none). >UNIX systems export the moral equivalent of INT 13 device ID's >(0x00 -- floppy A:, 0x01 -- floppy B:, 0x80 -- disk C:, 0x81 -- >disk D:, etc.). The confuse comes because the user doesn't have >a nice, clean, unified view of logical devices in UNIX (like he >does in DOS). I would have thought that the user doesn't have a nice, clean, unified view of logic devicies in DOS (like he does in UNIX) :-). Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603300311.OAA22757>