On Wed, 10 Dec 2025 15:24:50 +0000 (GMT) Stephen Borrill <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why 20140848, not 80563392? Even if I specify 80563392 with -s, it still only > grows to 20140848. I'm guessing but could it be that resize_ffs is also relying on other disk meta data for sanity checking: PMBR and disklabel? Do fdisk and disklabel show correct partition sizes which are not truncated for some reason?
