Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 20:56:10 +0200 From: Michael Gmelin <grembo@freebsd.org> To: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Lockdown adaX numbers to allow booting ? Message-ID: <AA25F90D-5603-4602-B17E-DFFF333D8299@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20190919171529.GH2863@home.opsec.eu> References: <20190919140219.GE2863@home.opsec.eu> <7E0AE025-596C-457E-BC40-41217857A3CD@me.com> <20190919155713.GG2863@home.opsec.eu> <3C855A39-BF79-4430-98CB-CB9174768E11@freebsd.org> <20190919171529.GH2863@home.opsec.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 19. Sep 2019, at 19:15, Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> wrote: >>> I've made a few more details available here: >=20 >>> https://people.freebsd.org/~pi/host/gpart.txt >=20 >> What about gpart output of the pool drives? >=20 > No gpart on the bck pool, raw drives. >=20 >> In general you would create zpools using gptids or gpt labels, not the de= vices, so you???re independent of device numbering. The boot loader should o= nly be installed on drives that contain the boot pool (maybe you have old bo= ot loaders on data drives?). >=20 > I think not, because they are used as raw drives. >=20 > Maybe that decision was an error in hindsight. Yeah, it=E2=80=99s not optimal that way. I made it a habit to use GPT on all= pools and label partitions with the enclosure slots they=E2=80=99re in (mak= es it easier to not make mistakes in case of emergency). I also leave a bit o= f space at the beginning and end of the drive (allows adding in a boot parti= tion later or more flexibility when replacing the drive). Anyway, I=E2=80=99m curious what the exact problem will turn out to be. Cheers, Michael >=20 > --=20 > pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 One year to go !=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AA25F90D-5603-4602-B17E-DFFF333D8299>