From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Thu Sep 3 19:09:25 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4069C9A39 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 19:09:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-qg0-f45.google.com (mail-qg0-f45.google.com [209.85.192.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B52AC929 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 19:09:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by qgx61 with SMTP id 61so36739406qgx.3 for ; Thu, 03 Sep 2015 12:09:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=pSAa1R/pqF1sZgvGt076HW3uns0TmUb/SaSwcpqF4fU=; b=eExjyklsSvZBV4hCnxZUNZ4K7QkzK2PbFdYRrbuO8RpFW8o49JY6+BEo2KWn3xXRbJ GncP/UgmMyMKm7//C1oN46V+I0Fd+tg1zVa+FP8RkI6ij7D+kgD8mhPWoce+UZQ1UT8u HSyxblqVAG/00tA68CsTBxAjCpzc4a6WB5okVAsVamDm+GQCN1ZEMLjpUa/1UKKxZEfx FtrMCYyf8HzReYEGq9H+Z2w9eQKeJTG0WcMggYMgnQnJYyrRWERR+N6Hdd5d9OfZ+hpp WZ73nahHyVc1/92nG+A9pvO8i3F/HqT5QASg0TMmuZ4BqyYYVZqNOuoeEUuYVCO9TrsE M3Ng== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk/UnHmcNLFw0tI11zb/d0CIAlBJ5rqBODFD2FgF4sbJMH2egWgYZ+R+IUhNdvI6vaw+S3P MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.35.103 with SMTP id m94mr8896954qgm.50.1441307357942; Thu, 03 Sep 2015 12:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.140.80.164 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 12:09:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [69.53.245.39] In-Reply-To: <20150903120134.GA75381@brick.home> References: <201509021408.t82E8h0Q038324@repo.freebsd.org> <20150902143702.GM1023@FreeBSD.org> <20150903120134.GA75381@brick.home> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 13:09:17 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1rxwOOAX8bZhMVZjo65Flhk7_80 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r287396 - in head: sbin/bsdlabel sbin/dumpfs sbin/fdisk sbin/ffsinfo sbin/mdconfig sbin/newfs sbin/newfs_msdos sbin/newfs_nandfs sbin/reboot share/man/man4 share/man/man7 share/man/man8... From: Warner Losh To: Gleb Smirnoff , src-committers , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 19:09:25 -0000 On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote: > On 0902T1737, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 02:08:43PM +0000, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote: > > E> Author: trasz > > E> Date: Wed Sep 2 14:08:43 2015 > > E> New Revision: 287396 > > E> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/287396 > > E> > > E> Log: > > E> It's 2015, and some people are still trying to use fdisk and then > > E> go asking what debug flags to set for GEOM to make it work. Advice > > E> them to use gpart(8) instead. > > E> > > E> Something similar should probably done with disklabel, > > E> but I need to rewrite the disklabel examples first. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Do we still have functionality of fdisk/bsdlabel that isn't covered > > by gpart? Can we simply remove the tools? > > I think it would be possible, but I don't plan to do it. Some > people are still happily using them, and they are used in scripts, > like the nanobsd build system. > Gpart still bogusly and steadfastly requires partitions to be aligned to the bogus cylinder boundaries that are largely made-up by different layers in the system (and are largely conflicting without any way to resolve the issue because some of the lie comes from hardware adapters). fdisk doesn't have this issue. Until gpart is fixed to make it's alignment to cylinder groups optional, fdisk must remain. As for nanobsd, I have plans to migrate them away from fdisk. None of the three conflicting patches I've gotten for it to date are quite right. Warner