Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 15:23:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Zepeda <garbanzo@hooked.net> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net> Cc: Bob Willcox <bob@pmr.com>, hackers list <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: "elf_loadexec: archsw.readin failed" on recent 3.1-stable Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9904041516510.802-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904041810290.380-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The defaults come from the disktab, but what harm could there be in
> doing the explicit version? You can do it 10 times over with no problem
> involved, so give it a try.
From the disklabel(8) man page:
[...]
The names of the programs are taken from the
``b0'' and ``b1'' parameters of the disktab(5) entry for the disk if
disktype was given and its disktab entry exists and includes those param-
eters. Otherwise, the default boot image names are used, these being:
/boot/boot1 and /boot/boot2 for the standard stage1 and stage2 boot im-
ages (details may vary on architectures like the Alpha, where only a sin-
gle-stage boot is used).
[...]
disklabel -B da0
Install a new bootstrap on da0. The boot code comes from /boot/boot1 and
possibly /boot/boot2. On-disk and in-core labels are unchanged.
So it seems to me that disklabel -B da0 will take /boot/boot1 and
/boot/boot2 unless you tell it otherwise, sure nothing would be harmed by
explicitly setting anything, but it seems like disklabel should pick up
the right boot blocks (and this can easily be checked).
- alex
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9904041516510.802-100000>