Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 01:16:23 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, nate@rocky.sri.MT.net Cc: bde@FreeBSD.org, hackers@FreeBSD.org, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr Subject: Re: Diskslice naming convention? Message-ID: <199509271516.BAA28325@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> There is no slice named 0. Slice _number_ 0 is the compatibility slice. >> Slice _number_ 1 is the whole disk. The slices that are _numbered_ 2-31 >> are _named_ 1-30. >Whoa. I'm lost now w/regards to the compatability slice. How exactly >is the compatability slice named, and how does it fit into the 'slice' >paradigm? The compatibility slice isn't named, unless you count xd#c (xd#c is the whole of the (logical) drive xd#). It doesn't really fit in with the slice paradigm. You use it when you only have one [FreeBSD] slice on the disk and don't want to think of others. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509271516.BAA28325>