Date: Sun, 9 Apr 1995 12:39:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@ref.tfs.com> To: spaz@u.washington.edu (John Utz) Cc: PVinci@ix.netcom.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: 2.1 install "upgrade" question? Message-ID: <199504091939.MAA26450@ref.tfs.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.91a.950409121315.13214A-100000@saul4.u.washington.edu> from "John Utz" at Apr 9, 95 12:37:26 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > This is such an sensible thing to suggest. Any idea where we find the > > time to do it ? > > > > This brings up an important question. If a user has multiple > disks dedicated to freebsd, can he just *centralize* all the *stock > distribution* stuff in one disk and use the other disks or even *partitions* > on the same disk to keep the stuff he has alread installed? > > I understand ( at least i think i do ) that the filesystem > structure changed between 1.1 and 2.0, but will it change between 2.0 and > 2.1? no. > The 2.0 and snap installs *appear* to assume that any disk it finds > is either: > > a. not going to be touched, but might be visited by FreeBSD in > the future ( ie dosfs ) or; > > b. FreeBSD property, and thereby subject to newfs. > > upon writing this it seems that it should be possible to just > tell the current install ( 2.0 and SNAP 3-22 and previous ) to leave the > old FreeBSD partitions alone, and then hand modify /etc/fstab later. it is. You can either refrain from "Assigning" a mount point, or you can assign it and use the "Preserve" option. > So the dm1,000,000 question is: > > WILL the 2.0 and 2.1 Filesystem formats be compatible??? yes. -- Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@login.dknet.dk> -- TRW Financial Systems, Inc. 'All relevant people are pertinent' && 'All rude people are impertinent' => 'no rude people are relevant'
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504091939.MAA26450>