subject:"Slices"


Hi Ian,

Thank you for all of your advices regarding my questions. I have been using 
FreeBSD for more than ten years, but I never heard of sade (sysadmins disk 
editor). That is one of the joyful things with running FreeBSD/Unix; there 
is always something earlier unheard of to explore. And, there is always 
more than one way to approach a problem.


Thank you Ian,

Conny


On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Ian Smith wrote:



In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 477, Issue 8, Message: 10
On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:39:30 +0200 (CEST) Conny Andersson atar...@telia.com 
wrote:
 Hi,

 I have a workstation with two factory installed hard disks. The first disk,
 ada0, is occupied by a Windows 7 Pro OS (mainly kept for the three year
 warranty of the workstation as Dell techs mostly speak the Microsoft
 language).

Yes, best humour adherents of the Almighty Bill - keeps them sweet.

 Instead I have configured the BIOS to boot from the MBR on the second disk
 as I most of the time (99%) use FreeBSD. The MBR on ada1 was installed with
 sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD Boot Manager, when I installed
 the FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE.

Right.  sysinstall(8) - or at least the fdisk and bsdlabel modules that
constitute sade(8) - remains the only safe and sane way to handle MBR
disks.  bsdinstall seems fine for GPT, but its paradigm doesn't play so
well with trying to do the sorts of manipulations you're talking about
here.  Why noone's tried to update sade(8) for GPT I don't understand;
it's a far better, more forgiving interface, in my old-fashioned? view.

 (The latest BIOS version 2.4.0 for Dell T1500 does not support
 UEFI/GPT/GUID.)

 The second disk ada1, now has three FreeBSD slices:

 1) ada1s1 with FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE

 2) ada1s2 with FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE

 3) ada1s3 with FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE

 I want to install the new FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE on ada1s1 by overwriting the
 now existing two first slices. This means that ada1s3, must become ada1s2
 instead. Is this possible to do?

Yes and no.  Using sysinstall|sade on my 9.1 laptop -- without setting
sysctl kern.geom.debugflags=16 so it can't write any inadvertent changes
to my disk :) -- in the fdisk screen you can delete the first two slices
freeing their space for a new slice (or two) and you can then allocate
s1 ok, but the existing s3 is still called s3.  Would that be a problem?

If you only created one slice there you'd have s1 and s3, with s2 and s4
marked as empty in the MBR shown by fdisk(8).  MBR slice order need not
follow disk allocations, eg s4 might point to an earlier disk region.

sysinstall|sade has undo options for both fdisk and bsdlabel modules;
it's easy to play with, no chance of damage - even with foot-shooting
flag set, unless/until you commit to changes.  If in doubt hit escape
until it backs right out, nothing will be written.

 A very important question is if sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD
 Boot Manager detects that I have a FreeBSD 8.3 and detect it as slice 2 on
 disk 1? So it becomes a boot option when I am rebooting? (Maybe the slice
 may come up as ad6s2, because AHCI in FreeBSD 8.4 isn't enabled at the time
 of the install.)

If you're running 8.4 sysinstall as init, ie booted into the installer,
and you've told it to install to s1, then it should set s1 as the active
partition in the disk table and in boot0cfg's active slice table.  I've
never tried it with a second disk so I can't confirm that will all play
nice, but you seem to have installed 3 versions ok before :)

If not, you can run boot0cfg(8) anytime to set the active slice etc, so
that shouldn't be a worry.  Likely need to set debugflags=16 to do that
on a running system also .. don't forget to set them back to 0 later!

(For anyone) still nervous about sade for setting up MBR disks, play
with a spare memstick, setup a couple of slices, boot0cfg etc, allocate
and delete slices and partitions.  Jordan got that together 15years ago
so noone would ever need to do those icky slice/partition maths again.
My theory: few have been brave enough to dare mess with $deity's work,
though it just needs some updates for modern realities, not abandonment.

[ Polytropon, it's not 'obsolete' at all; still in 9 anyway.  It'll be
obsolete when there are no more MBR-only systems in use - say 7 years -
OR when bsdinstall incorporates all the missing good sade(8) features,
which requires it making a clear distinction between GPT and MBR and
working accordingly, including cleaning up GPT stuff if MBR chosen.  At
9.1-R anyway, it doesn't do it so well for MBR.  Try installing over an
existing desired slice partitioning, newfs'ing everything EXCEPT your
valuable /home partition.  Not for beginners, yet simple in sade(8) ]

 If the answer to these questions is yes, then the next two questions arise.

 Can I mount ada1s2a (FreeBSD 8.3) from the newly installed FreeBSD 8.4 and
 edit my FreeBSD's 8.3-R /etc/fstab according to the new disk layout, and
 occasionally run FreeBSD 8.3 without problems? Or do I have

Re: FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager


Hi Peter,

I need much more disk space for the FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE, so I will need the 
space of the two 'old' slices.


Thanks,

Conny



On Sun, 28 Jul 2013, Peter Andreev wrote:



Why wouldn't you simply update your 8.1 to 8.4?


2013/7/27 Conny Andersson atar...@telia.com


Hi,

I have a workstation with two factory installed hard disks. The first
disk, ada0, is occupied by a Windows 7 Pro OS (mainly kept for the three
year warranty of the workstation as Dell techs mostly speak the Microsoft
language).

Instead I have configured the BIOS to boot from the MBR on the second disk
as I most of the time (99%) use FreeBSD. The MBR on ada1 was installed with
sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD Boot Manager, when I installed
the FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE.

(The latest BIOS version 2.4.0 for Dell T1500 does not support
UEFI/GPT/GUID.)

The second disk ada1, now has three FreeBSD slices:

1) ada1s1 with FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE

2) ada1s2 with FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE

3) ada1s3 with FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE

I want to install the new FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE on ada1s1 by overwriting the
now existing two first slices. This means that ada1s3, must become ada1s2
instead. Is this possible to do?

A very important question is if sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD
Boot Manager detects that I have a FreeBSD 8.3 and detect it as slice 2 on
disk 1? So it becomes a boot option when I am rebooting? (Maybe the slice
may come up as ad6s2, because AHCI in FreeBSD 8.4 isn't enabled at the time
of the install.)

If the answer to these questions is yes, then the next two questions arise.

Can I mount ada1s2a (FreeBSD 8.3) from the newly installed FreeBSD 8.4 and
edit my FreeBSD's 8.3-R /etc/fstab according to the new disk layout, and
occasionally run FreeBSD 8.3 without problems? Or do I have to do more to
get it to work?

The idea behind this kind of 'reverse' disk layout of mine is to have
FreeBSD 8.4 as my new default OS. And have FreeBSD 8.3 untouched for
configuring FreeBSD 8.4 and booting into it when ever needed. If I can do
this as described above, I will have plenty of space on the disk for the
future and a new FreeBSD release.


Thanks for your interest in my questions,

Conny Andersson

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Conny Andersson
atar...@telia.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager


Hi Warren and Polytropon,

A few minutes ago I booted up from a FreeBSD-8.4-RELEASE-amd64-memstick.img 
to experience that it is sysinstall that is used in that release.


Next, I did a 'dummy' custom installation. And, as I supposed sysinstall 
recognized disk ada0 as ad4 and disk ada1 as ad6. Then I aborted sysinstall 
and rebooted in to my FreeBSD 8.3-Release.


Well, AHCI (Serial ATA Advanced Host Controller Interface driver) seems 
involved when identifying disks and slices. But, only on newer computers 
who has this option set to on in the BIOS. Maybe, bsdinstall in FreeBSD 9.0 
and onwards can make use of AHCI directly.


When I bought this workstation and installed FreeBSD I thought something 
was very much wrong with the wiring of the hardware/disks and I phoned 
Dell's support ... without being much wiser.


My old Dell workstation on which I have used all the FreeBSD's from release 
4.8 up to 8.0 I always got ad0 and ad1 as the disks in use. So, I had to 
search the Internet for an answer why my new computer numbered disks oddly. 
And I found your web page Warren 
(http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/ahci.html) and I also read the 
ahci man page. I also had to edit my /etc/fstab accordingly.


My FreeBSD 8.3 /etc/fstab:

# DeviceMountpoint  FStype  Options  Dump   Pass#
/dev/ada1s3bnoneswapsw   0  0
/dev/ada1s3a/   ufs rw   1  1
/dev/ada1s3d/home   ufs rw   2  2
/dev/acd0   /cdrom  cd9660  ro,noauto0  0
proc/proc   procfs  rw   0  0
linproc  /compat/linux/proc   linprocfs rw   0  0

Apropos labels, I only have two filesystems (+swap) on each slice, as I 
only run a desktop workstation. I do that following Greg Lehey's advise in 
his book The Complete FreeBSD 4th Edition.


More apropos labels: The latest BIOS version 2.4.0 for Dell T1500 does not 
support UEFI/GPT/GUID. As far as I know, Dell only have the Unified 
Extensible Firmware Interface on its PowerEdge servers.


(The reason why I want to merge two slices into one big ada1s1 is the need 
for more disk space for FreeBSD 8.4 and keep 8.3 as it is, but then as 
slice 2).


Thank you,

Conny


On Sun, 28 Jul 2013, Warren Block wrote:



On Sun, 28 Jul 2013, Polytropon wrote:

On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:39:30 +0200 (CEST), Conny Andersson wrote:



A very important question is if sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD
Boot Manager detects that I have a FreeBSD 8.3 and detect it as slice 2 
on

disk 1?


I'm not sure I'm following you correctly. The sysinstall program
is considered obsolete, the new system installer is bsdinstall.


AFAIK, sysinstall is still used in FreeBSD 8.X, and bsdinstall does not have 
a boot manager option anyway.



So it becomes a boot option when I am rebooting? (Maybe the slice
may come up as ad6s2, because AHCI in FreeBSD 8.4 isn't enabled at the 
time

of the install.)


Sorry, I don't understand this at all.  AHCI should not be involved with 
identifying slices.



That is a _good_ consideration! To make sure things work independently
from boot-time recognition, use labels for the file system and then
mount them by using the labels. Encode the OS version number in the
labels, so it's even easier to deal with them. Use newfs -L on
un-mounted partitions (you can do that from the install media).


For existing filesystems, that would be tunefs -L.  And agreed, filesystem 
labels make relocation much easier.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager

2013-07-28 Thread Warren Block


On Sun, 28 Jul 2013, Conny Andersson wrote:


Hi Warren and Polytropon,

A few minutes ago I booted up from a FreeBSD-8.4-RELEASE-amd64-memstick.img 
to experience that it is sysinstall that is used in that release.


Next, I did a 'dummy' custom installation. And, as I supposed sysinstall 
recognized disk ada0 as ad4 and disk ada1 as ad6. Then I aborted sysinstall 
and rebooted in to my FreeBSD 8.3-Release.


Well, AHCI (Serial ATA Advanced Host Controller Interface driver) seems 
involved when identifying disks and slices. But, only on newer computers who 
has this option set to on in the BIOS. Maybe, bsdinstall in FreeBSD 9.0 and 
onwards can make use of AHCI directly.


At some point, the old ad(4) driver was replaced with the new ada(4) 
driver.  To provide backwards compatability, the old ad devices names 
are still available in /dev.  I don't know when FreeBSD 8.X switched to 
the ada(4) driver.


Neither ad nor ada devices require AHCI.  If it is available, it gives a 
small but noticeable speed increase.  Otherwise, it should make no 
difference.


More apropos labels: The latest BIOS version 2.4.0 for Dell T1500 does not 
support UEFI/GPT/GUID. As far as I know, Dell only have the Unified 
Extensible Firmware Interface on its PowerEdge servers.


There is more than one kind of label.  There are filesystem labels 
like we are talking about, there are GPT labels, there are generic 
labels.  The ones being suggested are filesystem labels:

http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/labels.html

FreeBSD supports GPT without UEFI.  It doesn't matter in this case, 
since you already have MBR.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager

2013-07-28 Thread Teske, Devin


On Jul 28, 2013, at 12:55 PM, Conny Andersson wrote:

 Hi Ian,
 
 Thank you for all of your advices regarding my questions. I have been using 
 FreeBSD for more than ten years, but I never heard of sade (sysadmins disk 
 editor). That is one of the joyful things with running FreeBSD/Unix; there is 
 always something earlier unheard of to explore. And, there is always more 
 than one way to approach a problem.
 

In this case, sade is (or was) a direct by-product of the death of 
sysinstall(8). It only exists in 9 or higher.

In-fact... sade was (up until recently in HEAD) actual code removed from 
sysinstall(8).

NOTE: In HEAD, sade(8) is now a direct path to bsdinstall partedit

I don't know what the long-term goals are for sade, but it's a nice 4-letter 
acronym that's a nice keystroke saver (at the very least).
-- 
Devin



 On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Ian Smith wrote:
 
 In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 477, Issue 8, Message: 10
 On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:39:30 +0200 (CEST) Conny Andersson 
 atar...@telia.com wrote:
  Hi,
 
  I have a workstation with two factory installed hard disks. The first disk,
  ada0, is occupied by a Windows 7 Pro OS (mainly kept for the three year
  warranty of the workstation as Dell techs mostly speak the Microsoft
  language).
 
 Yes, best humour adherents of the Almighty Bill - keeps them sweet.
 
  Instead I have configured the BIOS to boot from the MBR on the second disk
  as I most of the time (99%) use FreeBSD. The MBR on ada1 was installed with
  sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD Boot Manager, when I installed
  the FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE.
 
 Right.  sysinstall(8) - or at least the fdisk and bsdlabel modules that
 constitute sade(8) - remains the only safe and sane way to handle MBR
 disks.  bsdinstall seems fine for GPT, but its paradigm doesn't play so
 well with trying to do the sorts of manipulations you're talking about
 here.  Why noone's tried to update sade(8) for GPT I don't understand;
 it's a far better, more forgiving interface, in my old-fashioned? view.
 
  (The latest BIOS version 2.4.0 for Dell T1500 does not support
  UEFI/GPT/GUID.)
 
  The second disk ada1, now has three FreeBSD slices:
 
  1) ada1s1 with FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE
 
  2) ada1s2 with FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE
 
  3) ada1s3 with FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE
 
  I want to install the new FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE on ada1s1 by overwriting the
  now existing two first slices. This means that ada1s3, must become ada1s2
  instead. Is this possible to do?
 
 Yes and no.  Using sysinstall|sade on my 9.1 laptop -- without setting
 sysctl kern.geom.debugflags=16 so it can't write any inadvertent changes
 to my disk :) -- in the fdisk screen you can delete the first two slices
 freeing their space for a new slice (or two) and you can then allocate
 s1 ok, but the existing s3 is still called s3.  Would that be a problem?
 
 If you only created one slice there you'd have s1 and s3, with s2 and s4
 marked as empty in the MBR shown by fdisk(8).  MBR slice order need not
 follow disk allocations, eg s4 might point to an earlier disk region.
 
 sysinstall|sade has undo options for both fdisk and bsdlabel modules;
 it's easy to play with, no chance of damage - even with foot-shooting
 flag set, unless/until you commit to changes.  If in doubt hit escape
 until it backs right out, nothing will be written.
 
  A very important question is if sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD
  Boot Manager detects that I have a FreeBSD 8.3 and detect it as slice 2 on
  disk 1? So it becomes a boot option when I am rebooting? (Maybe the slice
  may come up as ad6s2, because AHCI in FreeBSD 8.4 isn't enabled at the time
  of the install.)
 
 If you're running 8.4 sysinstall as init, ie booted into the installer,
 and you've told it to install to s1, then it should set s1 as the active
 partition in the disk table and in boot0cfg's active slice table.  I've
 never tried it with a second disk so I can't confirm that will all play
 nice, but you seem to have installed 3 versions ok before :)
 
 If not, you can run boot0cfg(8) anytime to set the active slice etc, so
 that shouldn't be a worry.  Likely need to set debugflags=16 to do that
 on a running system also .. don't forget to set them back to 0 later!
 
 (For anyone) still nervous about sade for setting up MBR disks, play
 with a spare memstick, setup a couple of slices, boot0cfg etc, allocate
 and delete slices and partitions.  Jordan got that together 15years ago
 so noone would ever need to do those icky slice/partition maths again.
 My theory: few have been brave enough to dare mess with $deity's work,
 though it just needs some updates for modern realities, not abandonment.
 
 [ Polytropon, it's not 'obsolete' at all; still in 9 anyway.  It'll be
 obsolete when there are no more MBR-only systems in use - say 7 years -
 OR when bsdinstall incorporates all the missing good sade(8) features,
 which requires it making a clear distinction between GPT and MBR and
 working accordingly, including

Re: FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager

2013-07-28 Thread Polytropon

On Sun, 28 Jul 2013 22:23:38 +, Teske, Devin wrote:
 In this case, sade is (or was) a direct by-product of the death
 of sysinstall(8). It only exists in 9 or higher.

% which sade
/usr/sbin/sade

System is FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE of August 2011. I think sade has
been introduced in a v8 version of FreeBSD.



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager


Hi Devin,

Apropos sade (sysadmins disk editor). I have it at /usr/sbin/sade and I am 
running a FreeBSD 8.3. I also mounted FreeBSD 8.1 and FreeBSD 8.2 and found 
sade at /usr/sbin/ even in these older FreeBSDs.


Regards,

Conny


On Sun, 28 Jul 2013, Teske, Devin wrote:

In this case, sade is (or was) a direct by-product of the death of 
sysinstall(8). It only exists in 9 or higher.


In-fact... sade was (up until recently in HEAD) actual code removed from 
sysinstall(8).


NOTE: In HEAD, sade(8) is now a direct path to bsdinstall partedit

I don't know what the long-term goals are for sade, but it's a nice 
4-letter acronym that's a nice keystroke saver (at the very least).

--
Devin



On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Ian Smith wrote:
--- --- ---
Right.  sysinstall(8) - or at least the fdisk and bsdlabel modules that
constitute sade(8) - remains the only safe and sane way to handle MBR
disks.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager

2013-07-28 Thread Shane Ambler


On 29/07/2013 08:23, Polytropon wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jul 2013 22:23:38 +, Teske, Devin wrote:

In this case, sade is (or was) a direct by-product of the death
of sysinstall(8). It only exists in 9 or higher.


% which sade
/usr/sbin/sade

System is FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE of August 2011. I think sade has
been introduced in a v8 version of FreeBSD.



Or earlier. On 9.1 man sade says --

HISTORY
 This version of sade first appeared in FreeBSD 6.3.  The code is
 extracted from the sysinstall(8) utility.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

FreeBSD slices and the Boot Manager

2013-07-27 Thread Conny Andersson


Hi,

I have a workstation with two factory installed hard disks. The first disk, 
ada0, is occupied by a Windows 7 Pro OS (mainly kept for the three year 
warranty of the workstation as Dell techs mostly speak the Microsoft 
language).


Instead I have configured the BIOS to boot from the MBR on the second disk 
as I most of the time (99%) use FreeBSD. The MBR on ada1 was installed with 
sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD Boot Manager, when I installed 
the FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE.


(The latest BIOS version 2.4.0 for Dell T1500 does not support 
UEFI/GPT/GUID.)


The second disk ada1, now has three FreeBSD slices:

1) ada1s1 with FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE

2) ada1s2 with FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE

3) ada1s3 with FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE

I want to install the new FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE on ada1s1 by overwriting the 
now existing two first slices. This means that ada1s3, must become ada1s2 
instead. Is this possible to do?


A very important question is if sysinstall's option Install the FreeBSD 
Boot Manager detects that I have a FreeBSD 8.3 and detect it as slice 2 on 
disk 1? So it becomes a boot option when I am rebooting? (Maybe the slice 
may come up as ad6s2, because AHCI in FreeBSD 8.4 isn't enabled at the time 
of the install.)


If the answer to these questions is yes, then the next two questions arise.

Can I mount ada1s2a (FreeBSD 8.3) from the newly installed FreeBSD 8.4 and 
edit my FreeBSD's 8.3-R /etc/fstab according to the new disk layout, and 
occasionally run FreeBSD 8.3 without problems? Or do I have to do more to 
get it to work?


The idea behind this kind of 'reverse' disk layout of mine is to have 
FreeBSD 8.4 as my new default OS. And have FreeBSD 8.3 untouched for 
configuring FreeBSD 8.4 and booting into it when ever needed. If I can do 
this as described above, I will have plenty of space on the disk for the 
future and a new FreeBSD release.



Thanks for your interest in my questions,

Conny Andersson

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Conny Andersson
atar...@telia.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Groupping restored partitions into slices

2012-11-06 Thread Thomas Mueller

 Short version: Is it possible to group existing partitions into slices
 without affecting data?

 Long version:

 I had a disk sliced/partitioned like this:

 ad4s1
   ad4s1a
   ad4s1b (swap)
   ad4s1d
   ad4s1e
   ad4s1f
 ad4s2 (storage)
 ad4s3
   ad4s3a
   ad4s3b (swap)
   ad4s3d
   ad4s3e
   ad4s3f

 Then, I accidentally deleted *something* (wrong use of boot0cfg),
 which left me with /dev/ad4 only!

 scan_ffs correctly detected where all 9 data partitions begin. I
 created new bsdlabel table, wrote it to ad4, so I now have

 ad4a (former ad4s1a)
 ad4b (former ad4s1b - swap)
 ad4d (former ad4s1d)
 ad4e (former ad4s1e)
 ad4f (former ad4s1f)
 ad4g (former ad4s2)
 ad4h (former ad4s3a)
 and beginning sectors of the rest (former ad4s3d-f). Of course, I
 can't make more than 8 labels.

 I can mount all of them and I see my data. I can even 'swapon ad4b'.

 Now, the question: how can I restore s1, s2 and s3? As you can guess,
 s1 and s3 were working systems.

 Processing all this from FreeBSD-8/amd64 on another disc.

 Thanks!
 Sergi M

For FreeBSD as opposed to NetBSD, and I believe, OpenBSD, disklabels/bsdlabels
are for the slice rather than the whole disk, unless you partition the disk in
dangerously dedicated mode.  So you should create one bsdlabel for ad4s1 and
install to the beginning of that partition, and ahother bsdlabel for ad4s3 and
install to the beginning of ad4s3.  Installation would be using bsdlabel.

That's what I think, I could possibly be wrong.

You can check the bsdlabel man page, accessible online from www.freebsd.org,
even if you have no working installation of FreeBSD.

One, or actually twice, NetBSD overwrote my FreeBSD disklabel/bsdlabel.  The 
first time, I lost my FreeBSD installation but had nothing really to save,
it was time to upgrade to FreeBSD 8.0.  The second time, I had much software
installed, but had the bsdlabel information saved in a file.  I booted a
FreeBSD rescue CD and restored the FreeBSD disklabel/bsdlabel, and was back
in business.

Tom
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Groupping restored partitions into slices

2012-11-06 Thread Snow Mountains

Thomas, thank you for reply! No, it wasn't dangerously dedicated disk.

However, what is the exact command to add ad4s1 and ad4s3 using
bsdlabel? Is it possible  at all? I thought I should use fdisk or
gpart for that.

Thanks,
Sergi M
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Groupping restored partitions into slices

2012-11-06 Thread Thomas Mueller

Thomas, thank you for reply! No, it wasn't dangerously dedicated disk.

However, what is the exact command to add ad4s1 and ad4s3 using
bsdlabel? Is it possible at all? I thought I should use fdisk or
gpart for that.

Thanks,
Sergi M

You use fdisk to create what FreeBSD calls slices such as ad4s1, ad4s2, ad4s3
and disklabel to subdivide a slice into FreeBSD partitions such as ad4s1a,
ad4s1b, ad4s1c, etc. gpart is used to create GPT partitions such as ad4p1,
ad4p2, ad4p3, etc. Subdividing a slice into FreeBSD partitions is used with
MBR partition/slice table but not recommended with GPT.

The online FreeBSD bsdlabel man page is online at

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=bsdlabelapropos=0sektion=0manpath=FreeBSD+9.0-RELEASEarch=defaultformat=html

One example given is

This is an example disk label that uses some of the new partition size
types such as %, M, G, and *, which could be used as a source file for
``bsdlabel -R ad0s1 new_label_file'':

# /dev/ad0s1:

8 partitions:
#size offsetfstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg]
a: 400M 164.2BSD 4096 1638475 # (Cyl.0 -
812*)
b: 1G* swap
c: **unused
e: 204800*4.2BSD
f: 5g*4.2BSD
g: **4.2BSD

but you would have to replace the * with actual appropriate numbers.

After you install the disklabel, you could mount each data partition, but not
the swap partition, to see if the directory and file structure looks right.

Tom
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Groupping restored partitions into slices

2012-11-06 Thread Snow Mountains

Thomas, thank you very much for your mail, but that isn't what I asked.

Of course, I know that bsdlabel -R ad0s1 new_label_file writes new
labels to ad0s1.

My question is: what to do if I _lost_ s1, s2, and s3 - how to recover
_them_ first? Without that, all I can do is to write labels table
directly on ad0.

SergiM.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Groupping restored partitions into slices

2012-11-06 Thread Thomas Mueller

 Thomas, thank you very much for your mail, but that isn't what I asked.

 Of course, I know that bsdlabel -R ad0s1 new_label_file writes new
 labels to ad0s1.

 My question is: what to do if I _lost_ s1, s2, and s3 - how to recover
 _them_ first? Without that, all I can do is to write labels table
 directly on ad0.

 SergiM.

I thought you had found where the slices and partitions had been.  Otherwise,
if you only have the BSD partitions and need to label more than 8, there is
gpart in FreeBSD base system and Rod Smith's gdisk, available in FreeBSD ports
and also on the System Rescue CD (sysresccd.org).  If you switch to GPT, you 
can accommodate 128 partitions by default, and you wouldn't need the original
slices, just the BSD partitions in what had been the slices.

If you switch to GPT as opposed to MBR, you won't use bsdlabel; partitions for
each FreeBSD installation would be listed in /etc/fstab.

If you have the data, where each slice began and ended, you can restore the
slices with fdisk.

If you can find the BSD partitions and have the media space to backup to, you
might want to backup the partitions if feasible, as protection in case you
mess up.

NetBSD disklabel can accommodate up to 16 partitions per hard disk, but
FreeBSD might not be able to properly read a NetBSD disklabel.  Also, NetBSD
disklabel is very tricky and temperamental; I'd surely trust gdisk or gpart
over NetBSD disklabel.

Tom
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Can't find kernel, finds slices but no files on them

2012-09-20 Thread Matthew Seaman

On 19/09/2012 23:59, Polytropon wrote:
 The terminology is simple and as follows:
 
 A disk is a disk, e. g. /dev/ad0.
 
 A slice is a DOS primary partition on the disk, e. g. /dev/ad0s1.
 
 A partition is a subdivision of a slice, e. g. /dev/ad0s1a.
 
 Partitions can be used without a slice that encloses them,
 e. g. /dev/ad0a; this is called dedicated mode (because
 some obscure operating systems may have problems accessing
 something they cannot even understand).
 
 Tools like dump and restore operate on partitions.
 
 Tools like dd operate on everything.

What Polytropon says is perfectly correct, and accurate for setups using
MBR, fdisk(8) and bsdlabel(8).  However nowadays, the move is towards
using gpart(8) and the terminology is different there.  It looks like this:

% gpart show -p da0
=   34  134217661da0  GPT  (64G)
 34128  da0p1  freebsd-boot  (64k)
1624194304  da0p2  freebsd-swap  (2.0G)
4194466  130023229  da0p3  freebsd-zfs  (62G)

'da0' is the disk -- this is from a VM emulating a SAS controller, hence
'da' as the disk device.  That's not gpart specific, and you'll also
commonly see 'ad' or 'ada' for disk devices, plus some others specific
to certain hardware RAID controllers.

The disk has three partitions: da0p1, p2 and p3 of the indicated types.
There's also a freebsd-ufs type for those that don't want ZFS.

That's really all there is to it for all practical purposes.  There's no
need for 'partitions inside slices' or 'logical partitions' or any of
that malarkey.  I believe you could create partitions inside partitions
recursively to your heart's content but never cared enough to try that
out -- I think the device names would come out like 'da0p3p1' but I
could be wrong.

Cheers,

Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Can't find kernel, finds slices but no files on them

2012-09-20 Thread Fritiof Hedman

On 20 September 2012 00:59, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote:
 On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 00:22:20 +0200, Fritiof Hedman wrote:
 On 19 September 2012 23:37, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote:
  On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:28:30 +0200, Fritiof Hedman wrote:
  Hi list!
 
  I must warn you, I'm quite new to FreeBSD (I'm mostly using Linux
  otherwise). I have inherited an old (yes, very old) BSD 4.7 machine on
  my work that I need to clone. I've setuped an identical copy of the
  slices on the target machine, ran dump the source machine and restore
  on the target machine, edited /etc/fstab to match the filesystems. I'm
  also running the GENERIC-kernel, I've done this using the FreeSBIE
  live CD.
 
  What procedure did you use to clone? There basically is
  the one way, using dump + restore on partitions (not
  slices!), or dd on either partitions, slices, or the
  whole disk.
 

 I maybe not so sure about the nomenclature that is used in FreeBSD.

 The terminology is simple and as follows:

 A disk is a disk, e. g. /dev/ad0.

 A slice is a DOS primary partition on the disk, e. g. /dev/ad0s1.

 A partition is a subdivision of a slice, e. g. /dev/ad0s1a.

 Partitions can be used without a slice that encloses them,
 e. g. /dev/ad0a; this is called dedicated mode (because
 some obscure operating systems may have problems accessing
 something they cannot even understand).

 Tools like dump and restore operate on partitions.

 Tools like dd operate on everything.

Thanks for the clarification!




 However, I dumped /  on the source machine, and restored on /mnt/tmp
 on the source machine.

 I assume you did dump and restore via network?

 Like this?
 http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/backup.html#_tt_dump_tt_via_ssh

 Or this?
 http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/backup.html#_copying_filesystems

A combination of those...

dump -C16 -b64 -0uan -h0 -f - /|  ssh -c blowfish user@otherhost
(cd /tmp  restore -ruf -)



 Or did you have both disks in the same machine and transfer
 from one disk to the other?

 Anyway, if you have already reliably (!) confirmed that all
 data is in the location they are supposed to be, your
 copying procedure should have been fine.



  However, when I boot I get to BTX loader (so I guess boot0 and boot2
  is correct), that can't load kernel nor kernel.old. see attached
  img1.png .
 
  Images cannot be attached to list messages. :-(
 

 Oh, I see. It essentilally says something like:

 BTX loader 1.00 BTX version is 1.01
 Console: internal video/keyboard
 BIOS drive A: is disk0
 BIOS drive C: is disk1
 BIOS 638kB/1046464kB available memory

 FreeBSD/i386 bootstrap loader, Revision 0.8
 (r...@builder.freebsdmall.com, Wed Oct 9 12:33:26 GMT 2002)
 \
 Hit [Enter] to boot immediately, or any other key for command prompt.
 Booting [kernel]
 can't load 'kernel'
 can't load 'kernel.old'

 Type '?' for a list of commands, 'help' for more detailed help.
 ok ls
 open '/' failed: no such file or directory
 ok

 Did you try echo * and echo /boot/* (and related important
 directories) to make sure? Note that the * is _required_ in
 this specific case.


As you saw, the prompt just returns *.




  I can't ls, as the loader says there is no such file or
  directory (also seen in img1.png).
 
  You can use echo * in the loader stage, if I remember
  correctly. Enter ? for a list of the available loader
  commands (or was it help?).
 
 echo * just prints a pretty asterisk :)

 I'm not sure if this is really the proper command at the ok
 prompt (which is the state prior to loading the kernel); I
 could shutdown my machine to check...

 As I'm not very often sitting at the low level prompts,
 Ok and boot:, I'm not really sure.



 It was more or less that way I did id,  the difference were that I
 mounted /usr under /, and not unmount each partition every time.

 That's not required as long as your CWD within the hierarchy
 for restoring is correct, and the mountpoints you want to
 restore to are correctly accessible. For example, if you
 missed to mount /mnt/usr to (let's say) /dev/ad1s1e (the
 partition that would be /usr soon), stuff would go to the
 wrong place.

Everything got to the new place, so that should not be the problem.
 Did you transfer a multi-partition system (typically /, /var,
 /tmp, /usr and /home) or do you have everything in one big /
 partition?

Multi-partiton system



 I'm
 rerunning as the first document says that I should do (ie unmount the
 partition that I've just dumped and restored). I've  justed tested to
 do as described in the document, with the very same result.

 You should not mount the partition you _dump from_ (even
 though it's possible); only the partition you _restore to_
 has to be (!) mounted. It doesn't basically matter _where_
 it is mounted. As you could already locate the data at the
 correct places, we can assume that you did everything correct.

 To be sure, you could fsck the destination disks's partitions.
 Make sure they are not mounted

Can't find kernel, finds slices but no files on them

2012-09-19 Thread Fritiof Hedman

Hi list!

I must warn you, I'm quite new to FreeBSD (I'm mostly using Linux
otherwise). I have inherited an old (yes, very old) BSD 4.7 machine on
my work that I need to clone. I've setuped an identical copy of the
slices on the target machine, ran dump the source machine and restore
on the target machine, edited /etc/fstab to match the filesystems. I'm
also running the GENERIC-kernel, I've done this using the FreeSBIE
live CD.

However, when I boot I get to BTX loader (so I guess boot0 and boot2
is correct), that can't load kernel nor kernel.old. see attached
img1.png . I can't ls, as the loader says there is no such file or
directory (also seen in img1.png).
lsdev gives a correct answer, all slices are there with their correct
size. echo $currdev returns disk1s1a as it should (see attached
img2.png).

Mounting the disks works, and their content is correct, with all file
params set.

Any ideas how to get this target machine to boot?

Thanks in advance,
Fritiof Hedman
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Can't find kernel, finds slices but no files on them

2012-09-19 Thread Polytropon

On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:28:30 +0200, Fritiof Hedman wrote:
 Hi list!
 
 I must warn you, I'm quite new to FreeBSD (I'm mostly using Linux
 otherwise). I have inherited an old (yes, very old) BSD 4.7 machine on
 my work that I need to clone. I've setuped an identical copy of the
 slices on the target machine, ran dump the source machine and restore
 on the target machine, edited /etc/fstab to match the filesystems. I'm
 also running the GENERIC-kernel, I've done this using the FreeSBIE
 live CD.

What procedure did you use to clone? There basically is
the one way, using dump + restore on partitions (not
slices!), or dd on either partitions, slices, or the
whole disk.



 However, when I boot I get to BTX loader (so I guess boot0 and boot2
 is correct), that can't load kernel nor kernel.old. see attached
 img1.png .

Images cannot be attached to list messages. :-(



 I can't ls, as the loader says there is no such file or
 directory (also seen in img1.png).

You can use echo * in the loader stage, if I remember
correctly. Enter ? for a list of the available loader
commands (or was it help?).



 lsdev gives a correct answer, all slices are there with their correct
 size. echo $currdev returns disk1s1a as it should (see attached
 img2.png).

Good, so the copy you've created seems to be okay.



 Mounting the disks works, and their content is correct, with all file
 params set.
 
 Any ideas how to get this target machine to boot?

Maybe you just missed to prepare the boot attributes of the
new disk properly?

I suggest having a look at those documents:

Disk Setup On FreeBSD
http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html

Backup Options For FreeBSD
dump(8)/restore(8)
http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/backup.html#_em_dump_8_em_em_restore_8_em

I'm almost sure that you will need to re-initialize something
within the boot chain (guess without further diagnostics)...




-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Can't find kernel, finds slices but no files on them

2012-09-19 Thread Fritiof Hedman

On 19 September 2012 23:37, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote:
 On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:28:30 +0200, Fritiof Hedman wrote:
 Hi list!

 I must warn you, I'm quite new to FreeBSD (I'm mostly using Linux
 otherwise). I have inherited an old (yes, very old) BSD 4.7 machine on
 my work that I need to clone. I've setuped an identical copy of the
 slices on the target machine, ran dump the source machine and restore
 on the target machine, edited /etc/fstab to match the filesystems. I'm
 also running the GENERIC-kernel, I've done this using the FreeSBIE
 live CD.

 What procedure did you use to clone? There basically is
 the one way, using dump + restore on partitions (not
 slices!), or dd on either partitions, slices, or the
 whole disk.


I maybe not so sure about the nomenclature that is used in FreeBSD.
However, I dumped /  on the source machine, and restored on /mnt/tmp
on the source machine.




 However, when I boot I get to BTX loader (so I guess boot0 and boot2
 is correct), that can't load kernel nor kernel.old. see attached
 img1.png .

 Images cannot be attached to list messages. :-(


Oh, I see. It essentilally says something like:

BTX loader 1.00 BTX version is 1.01
Console: internal video/keyboard
BIOS drive A: is disk0
BIOS drive C: is disk1
BIOS 638kB/1046464kB available memory

FreeBSD/i386 bootstrap loader, Revision 0.8
(r...@builder.freebsdmall.com, Wed Oct 9 12:33:26 GMT 2002)
\
Hit [Enter] to boot immediately, or any other key for command prompt.
Booting [kernel]
can't load 'kernel'
can't load 'kernel.old'

Type '?' for a list of commands, 'help' for more detailed help.
ok ls
open '/' failed: no such file or directory
ok


 I can't ls, as the loader says there is no such file or
 directory (also seen in img1.png).

 You can use echo * in the loader stage, if I remember
 correctly. Enter ? for a list of the available loader
 commands (or was it help?).

echo * just prints a pretty asterisk :)



 lsdev gives a correct answer, all slices are there with their correct
 size. echo $currdev returns disk1s1a as it should (see attached
 img2.png).

 Good, so the copy you've created seems to be okay.



 Mounting the disks works, and their content is correct, with all file
 params set.

 Any ideas how to get this target machine to boot?

 Maybe you just missed to prepare the boot attributes of the
 new disk properly?

 I suggest having a look at those documents:

 Disk Setup On FreeBSD
 http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html

 Backup Options For FreeBSD
 dump(8)/restore(8)
 http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/backup.html#_em_dump_8_em_em_restore_8_em

 I'm almost sure that you will need to re-initialize something
 within the boot chain (guess without further diagnostics)...

It was more or less that way I did id,  the difference were that I
mounted /usr under /, and not unmount each partition every time. I'm
rerunning as the first document says that I should do (ie unmount the
partition that I've just dumped and restored). I've  justed tested to
do as described in the document, with the very same result.

Yeah, that's my guess as well. Maybe I should do the minimal install
of the FreeBSD image first, boot into  a live mode and then restore
everything upon the disks? That would keep any boot flags on the disks
right. But the thing that is annoying is that the loader can't browse
the content of the disk. I guess that's the main issue here.

Cheers,
Fritiof






 --
 Polytropon
 Magdeburg, Germany
 Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Can't find kernel, finds slices but no files on them

2012-09-19 Thread Polytropon

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 00:22:20 +0200, Fritiof Hedman wrote:
 On 19 September 2012 23:37, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote:
  On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:28:30 +0200, Fritiof Hedman wrote:
  Hi list!
 
  I must warn you, I'm quite new to FreeBSD (I'm mostly using Linux
  otherwise). I have inherited an old (yes, very old) BSD 4.7 machine on
  my work that I need to clone. I've setuped an identical copy of the
  slices on the target machine, ran dump the source machine and restore
  on the target machine, edited /etc/fstab to match the filesystems. I'm
  also running the GENERIC-kernel, I've done this using the FreeSBIE
  live CD.
 
  What procedure did you use to clone? There basically is
  the one way, using dump + restore on partitions (not
  slices!), or dd on either partitions, slices, or the
  whole disk.
 
 
 I maybe not so sure about the nomenclature that is used in FreeBSD.

The terminology is simple and as follows:

A disk is a disk, e. g. /dev/ad0.

A slice is a DOS primary partition on the disk, e. g. /dev/ad0s1.

A partition is a subdivision of a slice, e. g. /dev/ad0s1a.

Partitions can be used without a slice that encloses them,
e. g. /dev/ad0a; this is called dedicated mode (because
some obscure operating systems may have problems accessing
something they cannot even understand).

Tools like dump and restore operate on partitions.

Tools like dd operate on everything.



 However, I dumped /  on the source machine, and restored on /mnt/tmp
 on the source machine.

I assume you did dump and restore via network?

Like this?
http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/backup.html#_tt_dump_tt_via_ssh

Or this?
http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/backup.html#_copying_filesystems

Or did you have both disks in the same machine and transfer
from one disk to the other?

Anyway, if you have already reliably (!) confirmed that all
data is in the location they are supposed to be, your
copying procedure should have been fine.



  However, when I boot I get to BTX loader (so I guess boot0 and boot2
  is correct), that can't load kernel nor kernel.old. see attached
  img1.png .
 
  Images cannot be attached to list messages. :-(
 
 
 Oh, I see. It essentilally says something like:
 
 BTX loader 1.00 BTX version is 1.01
 Console: internal video/keyboard
 BIOS drive A: is disk0
 BIOS drive C: is disk1
 BIOS 638kB/1046464kB available memory
 
 FreeBSD/i386 bootstrap loader, Revision 0.8
 (r...@builder.freebsdmall.com, Wed Oct 9 12:33:26 GMT 2002)
 \
 Hit [Enter] to boot immediately, or any other key for command prompt.
 Booting [kernel]
 can't load 'kernel'
 can't load 'kernel.old'
 
 Type '?' for a list of commands, 'help' for more detailed help.
 ok ls
 open '/' failed: no such file or directory
 ok

Did you try echo * and echo /boot/* (and related important
directories) to make sure? Note that the * is _required_ in
this specific case.




  I can't ls, as the loader says there is no such file or
  directory (also seen in img1.png).
 
  You can use echo * in the loader stage, if I remember
  correctly. Enter ? for a list of the available loader
  commands (or was it help?).
 
 echo * just prints a pretty asterisk :)

I'm not sure if this is really the proper command at the ok
prompt (which is the state prior to loading the kernel); I
could shutdown my machine to check...

As I'm not very often sitting at the low level prompts,
Ok and boot:, I'm not really sure.



 It was more or less that way I did id,  the difference were that I
 mounted /usr under /, and not unmount each partition every time.

That's not required as long as your CWD within the hierarchy
for restoring is correct, and the mountpoints you want to
restore to are correctly accessible. For example, if you
missed to mount /mnt/usr to (let's say) /dev/ad1s1e (the
partition that would be /usr soon), stuff would go to the
wrong place.

Did you transfer a multi-partition system (typically /, /var,
/tmp, /usr and /home) or do you have everything in one big /
partition?



 I'm
 rerunning as the first document says that I should do (ie unmount the
 partition that I've just dumped and restored). I've  justed tested to
 do as described in the document, with the very same result.

You should not mount the partition you _dump from_ (even
though it's possible); only the partition you _restore to_
has to be (!) mounted. It doesn't basically matter _where_
it is mounted. As you could already locate the data at the
correct places, we can assume that you did everything correct.

To be sure, you could fsck the destination disks's partitions.
Make sure they are not mounted. That should be no problem from
a FreeSBIE disc (which I also consider a very good tool).



 Yeah, that's my guess as well. Maybe I should do the minimal install
 of the FreeBSD image first, boot into  a live mode and then restore
 everything upon the disks?

As a lazyness graduate, this is what I do (when I don't have
a scripted solution, e. g. for only _one_ use). :-)

Make sure you have

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?


it without any problem. It _may_ be possible that some
systems like Windows have trouble with this approach,


what trouble? Windows doesn't probably see anything.

anyway i would not risk running windows with FreeBSD containing disk 
connected at the same time anyway. it's always risky.



To OP:

If you omit the slice and just create two partitions (one for
FS and one for swap), FreeBSD will use this fine. Just make

bsdlabel -B device is just enough after that
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?


Ah the FAQ
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/disks.html#DANGEROUSLY-DEDICATED

I don't think it's dangerous either.
Thanks for your explanations.


While it's far simpler. Anyway i wasn't aware it's called that way as i 
don't use installer

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?


disks. Maybe you get a
few kb of extra space. Don't do it.

because?


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?



Is there any performance advantage to using a dedicated disk layout


no. it is simplicity adventage, as well as (for SSD and 4K sector disks) 
far easier to put partitions aligned.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-07 Thread Polytropon

On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 11:16:33 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote:
  Ah the FAQ
  http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/disks.html#DANGEROUSLY-DEDICATED
 
  I don't think it's dangerous either.
  Thanks for your explanations.
 
 While it's far simpler. Anyway i wasn't aware it's called that way as i 
 don't use installer

As far as I know, the installer dropped dedicated mode some time
ago. So if you intendedly want to use it, you need to bypass the
installer and do the few simple steps using the CLI.



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-07 Thread Polytropon

On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 11:15:44 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote:
  it without any problem. It _may_ be possible that some
  systems like Windows have trouble with this approach,
 
 what trouble? Windows doesn't probably see anything.

I have _no_ idea. Systems behaving in a manner you cannot
expect or predict are hard to tell in what they could do
wrong on a non-standard setting (from their point of
view of course).



 anyway i would not risk running windows with FreeBSD containing disk 
 connected at the same time anyway. it's always risky.

It maybe suggests to repair it... :-)



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?



While it's far simpler. Anyway i wasn't aware it's called that way as i
don't use installer


As far as I know, the installer dropped dedicated mode some time
ago. So if you intendedly want to use it, you need to bypass the
installer and do the few simple steps using the CLI.

i already do this, by not starting it at all.

bootable pendrive with complete system is all i need. nothing more than 
bsdlabel newfs and COPY is needed

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?



http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/09.03.shtml


That is EXTREMELY old advice.

completely irrevelant now.

Why so many people blindly repeat some rules without understanding it. 
Even years after that rule no longer matters.


The other example is creating lots of partitions.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?


environment.


gpart(8) can create MBR slice/partition layouts (and GPT and other partition 
schemes).  See the man page.  There is little reason to use fdisk and 
bsdlabel any more.


i use only disklabel, no fdisk at all. i put partition start sector where 
i want - no align problems.


I did not use gpart for now in production as i have no 2TB disk where i 
want to do partition at all.


Actually i've got quite a few 3TB disks recently but there are no both 
gpart, fdisk or disklabels on them, just single full disk(*) filesystem 
for user data.


* - actually gmirror of 3 disks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

Hi All,

Installing FreeBSD 8.x I select A at the fdisk partition editor to
use the entire disk.  It creates an unused slice with offset 0 and 63
sectors in size.  Then partition 1 starts at sector 63 and utilizes
the remaining disk space.  Does sysinstall's diskPartitonEditor macro
automatically start partitions at head boundaries?  The reason I ask
is because I am most familiar with sector 64 being the start of a head
boundary as opposed to 63.  Is my understanding incorrect?

-- 
Take care
Rick Miller
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Wojciech Puchar


automatically start partitions at head boundaries?  The reason I ask
is because I am most familiar with sector 64 being the start of a head
boundary as opposed to 63.  Is my understanding incorrect?

yes. 63 is normal.

Anyway just don't make slices at all if your disk is dedicated to FreeBSD
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Ryan Coleman


On 7/6/2012 11:43 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:

automatically start partitions at head boundaries?  The reason I ask
is because I am most familiar with sector 64 being the start of a head
boundary as opposed to 63.  Is my understanding incorrect?

yes. 63 is normal.

Anyway just don't make slices at all if your disk is dedicated to FreeBSD 


Except for swap, right?

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Robert Huff


Ryan Coleman writes:

   Anyway just don't make slices at all if your disk is dedicated
   to FreeBSD  
  
  Except for swap, right?

Why do you say that?


Robert huff



___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Bas Smeelen


On 07/06/2012 07:28 PM, Robert Huff wrote:

Ryan Coleman writes:


   Anyway just don't make slices at all if your disk is dedicated
   to FreeBSD
  
  Except for swap, right?

Why do you say that?


Robert huff





I think Ryan means partition and not slice?
I would not recommend no slices at all, It's deprecated to use 
dangerously dedicated disks


Starting with 9 I don't see slices in mount ouput anymore but still 
there are FreeBSD partitions in slices (which is a partitions in dos terms)

Example / is now disk0p1 it used to be disk0s1a







Disclaimer: http://www.ose.nl/email

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Ryan Coleman edi...@d3photography.com wrote:
 Sector 64 is sector 63 when you start at 0.

OMG, so right...I cannot believe that went over my head!  Thanks for
pointing it out.  It lets me know that diskPartitionEditor is
automatically selecting start and end sectors at boundaries.  Thanks!

-- 
Take care
Rick Miller
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Wojciech Puchar



Anyway just don't make slices at all if your disk is dedicated to FreeBSD 


Except for swap, right?



wrong.

i said slices (==DOS/Windoze MBR partitions), not disklabel
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Wojciech Puchar


I think Ryan means partition and not slice?
I would not recommend no slices at all, It's deprecated to use dangerously 
dedicated disks


Starting with 9 I don't see slices in mount ouput anymore but still there are 
FreeBSD partitions in slices (which is a partitions in dos terms)

Example / is now disk0p1 it used to be disk0s1a


you use GUID partition table.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Polytropon

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:47:27 +0200, Bas Smeelen wrote:
 On 07/06/2012 07:28 PM, Robert Huff wrote:
  Ryan Coleman writes:
 
 Anyway just don't make slices at all if your disk is dedicated
 to FreeBSD

Except for swap, right?
  Why do you say that?
 
 
  Robert huff
 
 
 
 
 I think Ryan means partition and not slice?
 I would not recommend no slices at all, It's deprecated to use 
 dangerously dedicated disks

First of all, it's dedicated disks, there's nothing dangerous
related. :-)

If you are using the MBR approach (old way), you can do
either creating a DOS primary partition, a slice, which
then will contain your partitions: a swap partition and
one or more UFS partitions. So you have ad0s1a, ad0s1b
and so on.

When you omit the slice and create the partitions on the bare
disk, you have a dedicated layout. FreeBSD will run with
it without any problem. It _may_ be possible that some
systems like Windows have trouble with this approach,
but if you're going to use FreeBSD only on that disk, there
is no danger, no problem. You have ad0a, ad0b and so on.

If you are using the GPT approach (new way), you create
partitions using a different tool set, setting them to be
a file system or a swap partition. You end up in ad0p1,
ad0p2 and so on. Note that those aren't DOS primary
partitions anymore, outdated systems may not properly
recognize them.

If you label your partitions (you can do that with both
approaches), you don't need to deal with device names at
all.



 Starting with 9 I don't see slices in mount ouput anymore but still 
 there are FreeBSD partitions in slices (which is a partitions in dos terms)
 Example / is now disk0p1 it used to be disk0s1a

Correct, this relation can be constructed.



To OP:

If you omit the slice and just create two partitions (one for
FS and one for swap), FreeBSD will use this fine. Just make
sure to set the boot parameters properly. Or simply use the
GPT-related tools, so you don't have to deal with the question
at all.




-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Bas Smeelen


On 07/06/2012 08:25 PM, Polytropon wrote:

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:47:27 +0200, Bas Smeelen wrote:

On 07/06/2012 07:28 PM, Robert Huff wrote:

Ryan Coleman writes:


Anyway just don't make slices at all if your disk is dedicated
to FreeBSD
   
   Except for swap, right?

Why do you say that?


Robert huff




I think Ryan means partition and not slice?
I would not recommend no slices at all, It's deprecated to use
dangerously dedicated disks

First of all, it's dedicated disks, there's nothing dangerous
related. :-)


Hi Polytropon
I got this from the docs somewhere, let me search
Ah the FAQ
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/disks.html#DANGEROUSLY-DEDICATED

I don't think it's dangerous either.
Thanks for your explanations.



If you are using the MBR approach (old way), you can do
either creating a DOS primary partition, a slice, which
then will contain your partitions: a swap partition and
one or more UFS partitions. So you have ad0s1a, ad0s1b
and so on.

When you omit the slice and create the partitions on the bare
disk, you have a dedicated layout. FreeBSD will run with
it without any problem. It _may_ be possible that some
systems like Windows have trouble with this approach,
but if you're going to use FreeBSD only on that disk, there
is no danger, no problem. You have ad0a, ad0b and so on.

If you are using the GPT approach (new way), you create
partitions using a different tool set, setting them to be
a file system or a swap partition. You end up in ad0p1,
ad0p2 and so on. Note that those aren't DOS primary
partitions anymore, outdated systems may not properly
recognize them.

If you label your partitions (you can do that with both
approaches), you don't need to deal with device names at
all.




Starting with 9 I don't see slices in mount ouput anymore but still
there are FreeBSD partitions in slices (which is a partitions in dos terms)
Example / is now disk0p1 it used to be disk0s1a

Correct, this relation can be constructed.



To OP:

If you omit the slice and just create two partitions (one for
FS and one for swap), FreeBSD will use this fine. Just make
sure to set the boot parameters properly. Or simply use the
GPT-related tools, so you don't have to deal with the question
at all.









Disclaimer: http://www.ose.nl/email
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

[snip]

 I think Ryan means partition and not slice?
 I would not recommend no slices at all, It's deprecated to use
 dangerously dedicated disks

 First of all, it's dedicated disks, there's nothing dangerous
 related. :-)

 If you are using the MBR approach (old way), you can do
 either creating a DOS primary partition, a slice, which
 then will contain your partitions: a swap partition and
 one or more UFS partitions. So you have ad0s1a, ad0s1b
 and so on.

 When you omit the slice and create the partitions on the bare
 disk, you have a dedicated layout. FreeBSD will run with
 it without any problem. It _may_ be possible that some
 systems like Windows have trouble with this approach,
 but if you're going to use FreeBSD only on that disk, there
 is no danger, no problem. You have ad0a, ad0b and so on.

 If you are using the GPT approach (new way), you create
 partitions using a different tool set, setting them to be
 a file system or a swap partition. You end up in ad0p1,
 ad0p2 and so on. Note that those aren't DOS primary
 partitions anymore, outdated systems may not properly
 recognize them.

 If you label your partitions (you can do that with both
 approaches), you don't need to deal with device names at
 all.

Thanks for this explanation.

Is there any performance advantage to using a dedicated disk layout
over the old way of creating a slice and having your partitions within
it?

[snip]

 To OP:

 If you omit the slice and just create two partitions (one for
 FS and one for swap), FreeBSD will use this fine. Just make
 sure to set the boot parameters properly. Or simply use the
 GPT-related tools, so you don't have to deal with the question
 at all.

Thanks again for the concise explanation.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Eitan Adler

On 6 July 2012 11:44, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote:
 Thanks for this explanation.

 Is there any performance advantage to using a dedicated disk layout
 over the old way of creating a slice and having your partitions within
 it?

Slices isn't the old way. There is no perf advantage for dedicated
disks. Maybe you get a
few kb of extra space. Don't do it.

http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/09.03.shtml

-- 
Eitan Adler
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Polytropon

On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 11:58:03 -0700, Eitan Adler wrote:
 On 6 July 2012 11:44, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote:
  Thanks for this explanation.
 
  Is there any performance advantage to using a dedicated disk layout
  over the old way of creating a slice and having your partitions within
  it?
 
 Slices isn't the old way.

Compared to the new and modern GPT, it is. :-)

However, if you keep using the old way, it will still be
supported and will not confuse either BIOSes or other systems
that are maybe installed on your machine.



 There is no perf advantage for dedicated
 disks. Maybe you get a
 few kb of extra space.

I'm also not aware of any performance issues.



 Don't do it.
 
 http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/09.03.shtml

According to the article, there are some BIOSes that don't
seem to like disks not containing a DOS primary partition
to start their boot chain. While this may be true, I have
never experienced it.

For maximum security, you can use the old approach of
using fdisk + disklabel (creating slice, creating partitions
within slice). This also delivers most compatibility for
other systems, if it should be needed, e. g. in a multiboot
environment.





-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Michael Sierchio

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote:

 Slices isn't the old way. There is no perf advantage for dedicated
 disks. Maybe you get a
 few kb of extra space. Don't do it.

 http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/09.03.shtml

That is EXTREMELY old advice.  The general advice, for this and many
other things, is - don't do it, but if you do it, know what you're
doing. ;-)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Bas Smeelen


On 07/06/2012 09:06 PM, Michael Sierchio wrote:

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote:


Slices isn't the old way. There is no perf advantage for dedicated
disks. Maybe you get a
few kb of extra space. Don't do it.

http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/09.03.shtml

That is EXTREMELY old advice.  The general advice, for this and many
other things, is - don't do it, but if you do it, know what you're
doing. ;-)


agree, advice: don't use dedicated disks, it might be dangerous if 
another fdisk silently modifies your disk or the BIOS does not 
understand it.

It's still in the FAQ though :)
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/disks.html#DANGEROUSLY-DEDICATED






Disclaimer: http://www.ose.nl/email

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

I went through this exercise to determine if there were boundary
issues installing FreeBSD on disks.  I concluded that FreeBSD was
indeed installing at head boundaries.  A colleague then pointed me to
http://ivoras.net/blog/tree/2011-01-01.freebsd-on-4k-sector-drives.html
which calls into question whether sysinstall and fdisk really are
installing FreeBSD's slice at the 64th cylinder.  Should I be
concerned with this?

This came about due to a scenario where Linux would start its
filesystem at sector 63, right before the head boundary.  On I/O
intensive applications, it was common for reads/write to cross the
head boundary resulting in unnecessary disk thrashing and long I/O
wait times.  The issue was corrected in Linux by changing the start
cylinder to 2048.  Some theorized that FreeBSD was vulnerable to this
scenario.

Thoughts/feedback?

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote:
 Hi All,

 Installing FreeBSD 8.x I select A at the fdisk partition editor to
 use the entire disk.  It creates an unused slice with offset 0 and 63
 sectors in size.  Then partition 1 starts at sector 63 and utilizes
 the remaining disk space.  Does sysinstall's diskPartitonEditor macro
 automatically start partitions at head boundaries?  The reason I ask
 is because I am most familiar with sector 64 being the start of a head
 boundary as opposed to 63.  Is my understanding incorrect?

 --
 Take care
 Rick Miller



-- 
Take care
Rick Miller
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Does FreeBSD start slices at head boundaries?

2012-07-06 Thread Warren Block


On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Polytropon wrote:


For maximum security, you can use the old approach of
using fdisk + disklabel (creating slice, creating partitions
within slice). This also delivers most compatibility for
other systems, if it should be needed, e. g. in a multiboot
environment.


gpart(8) can create MBR slice/partition layouts (and GPT and other 
partition schemes).  See the man page.  There is little reason to use 
fdisk and bsdlabel any more.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-05 Thread perryh

Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:

  How do I wipe the whole thing in one go so that I can start
  afresh?
 
  gpart destroy ad4 ??

 Yes, but first you must delete all of the slices/partitions.
 Think of it this way: you must go backwards down the path you
 just came with a delete for each add, then a destroy for each
 create.

So there is no way to just say clean up this whole disk in a
single operation?  That seems a considerable step backwards,
given that the old tools have fdisk -i and bsdlabel -w.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-05 Thread Robert Simmons

On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 3:35 AM,  per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
 Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
  How do I wipe the whole thing in one go so that I can start
  afresh?
 
  gpart destroy ad4 ??

 Yes, but first you must delete all of the slices/partitions.
 Think of it this way: you must go backwards down the path you
 just came with a delete for each add, then a destroy for each
 create.

 So there is no way to just say clean up this whole disk in a
 single operation?  That seems a considerable step backwards,
 given that the old tools have fdisk -i and bsdlabel -w.

I've never had to use it, but I think gpart destroy -F ad4 is what
you are looking for, so I guess it is not necessary to step backwards
after all.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-05 Thread Erik Nørgaard


On 5/6/11 7:03 AM, Robert Simmons wrote:

On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:40:22 AM Matthias Apitz wrote:

# gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
# gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
# gpart create -s bsd ad4s1   # Init with a BSD scheme
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /
# gpart add -t freebsd-swap -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for swap
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for /var
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /tmp
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs ad4s1  # all rest for /usr
# gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4


You need to install the bootcode:

This will install the interactive one:
gpart bootcode -b /mnt2/boot/boot0 ad4

this will install the non-interactive one:
gpart bootcode -b /mnt2/boot/mbr ad4


Thanks Warren, great article, and thanks all for the follow up posts as 
well.


Just one more question, the usual mbr and boot files will boot a gpt 
partition? I see there are some additional files gptboot and pmbr?


Thanks, Erik
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-05 Thread Warren Block


On Sat, 4 Jun 2011, Robert Simmons wrote:


On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:

There's a sample in the second half of my disk setup article:

http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html


Looks good.  I have a few critiques:

1) Linux and FreeBSD do not have alignment requirements, as far as I
know.  So you may want to include a note about this when you say
Create partition for /. It should start at the 1M boundary for
alignment on 4K sector drives, or 2048 blocks:  This would only be
necessary for dual-boot with an OS that has alignment requirements
such as windows.  This would essentially be the difference between the
two old methods of dedicated and not.


The 1M size is compatible with Windows and aligns partitions for better 
performance on 4K sector drives.  Doesn't affect performance on 512-byte 
sector drives, easier to set up initially than add later, and costs less 
than 1M of space.  Cheap compatibility insurance, I guess I'm saying.



2) Perhaps add a note about softupdates (-U) for partitions other than
/ when you describe the newfs steps.


Yikes, yes.


I think your article would be a good place to start for making an
updated section in the handbook.


Thanks!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-04 Thread Erik Nørgaard


Hi:

I just realized how many years ago I haven't been partitioning any disks 
.. this system is so stable :) So, now I see I have gpart as alternative 
to fdisk/bsdlabel.


I have a 320GB disk which will be dedicated to FBSD, is there any 
advantage - or any problems (problems as in I've never tried that 
before) - using gpart instead of the old scheme?


Do I need kernel modules not in the generic kernel or create extra boot 
partition?


Thanks, Erik
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Erik Nørgaard norga...@locolomo.org wrote:
 - or any problems (problems as in I've never tried that before) - using
 gpart instead of the old scheme?

Sorry for the double post, but the only problem that I've encountered
is after creating a encrypted provider with geli(8), that provider
cannot be partitioned using the GPT scheme.  You can still partition
it using gpart(8), but the scheme must be BSD or MBR.

I am not sure whether this is a bug or just the way GPT partitions
work, but it is not that big of a problem unless you want to have very
large encrypted providers that are GPT scheme partitions.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Erik Nørgaard norga...@locolomo.org wrote:
 I just realized how many years ago I haven't been partitioning any disks ..
 this system is so stable :) So, now I see I have gpart as alternative to
 fdisk/bsdlabel.

gpart(8) from my experience is far superior to all the older tools.


 I have a 320GB disk which will be dedicated to FBSD, is there any advantage
 - or any problems (problems as in I've never tried that before) - using
 gpart instead of the old scheme?

It is clean and clear as to what you are doing, and it supports GPT
scheme partitions.


 Do I need kernel modules not in the generic kernel or create extra boot
 partition?

If you use it to make GPT partitions, you will need a freebsd-boot
partition with the proper bootcode for what you want to do.  If you
search this mailing list's archive, I've posted basic instructions for
gpart/GPT partitioning recently, perhaps there needs to be a section
added to Handbook 18.3.2 describing the basics.  Unfortunately, the
only mention in the handbook is a link to the man page in section
18.3.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-04 Thread Warren Block


On Sat, 4 Jun 2011, Robert Simmons wrote:


Do I need kernel modules not in the generic kernel or create extra boot
partition?


If you use it to make GPT partitions, you will need a freebsd-boot
partition with the proper bootcode for what you want to do.  If you
search this mailing list's archive, I've posted basic instructions for
gpart/GPT partitioning recently, perhaps there needs to be a section
added to Handbook 18.3.2 describing the basics.  Unfortunately, the
only mention in the handbook is a link to the man page in section
18.3.


There's a sample in the second half of my disk setup article:

http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
 There's a sample in the second half of my disk setup article:

 http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html

Looks good.  I have a few critiques:

1) Linux and FreeBSD do not have alignment requirements, as far as I
know.  So you may want to include a note about this when you say
Create partition for /. It should start at the 1M boundary for
alignment on 4K sector drives, or 2048 blocks:  This would only be
necessary for dual-boot with an OS that has alignment requirements
such as windows.  This would essentially be the difference between the
two old methods of dedicated and not.

2) Perhaps add a note about softupdates (-U) for partitions other than
/ when you describe the newfs steps.

3) I like to put /root in its own partition on the off chance that it
fills up.  That way it's in a little sandbox and does not fill /.  But
this is personal preference, I guess.

I think your article would be a good place to start for making an
updated section in the handbook.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-04 Thread Matthias Apitz

El día Saturday, June 04, 2011 a las 08:43:37PM -0600, Warren Block escribió:

 On Sat, 4 Jun 2011, Robert Simmons wrote:
 
  Do I need kernel modules not in the generic kernel or create extra boot
  partition?
 
  If you use it to make GPT partitions, you will need a freebsd-boot
  partition with the proper bootcode for what you want to do.  If you
  search this mailing list's archive, I've posted basic instructions for
  gpart/GPT partitioning recently, perhaps there needs to be a section
  added to Handbook 18.3.2 describing the basics.  Unfortunately, the
  only mention in the handbook is a link to the man page in section
  18.3.
 
 There's a sample in the second half of my disk setup article:
 
 http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/disksetup.html

Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
following sequence:

# gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
# gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
# gpart create -s bsd ad4s1   # Init with a BSD scheme
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /
# gpart add -t freebsd-swap -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for swap
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for /var
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /tmp
# gpart add -t freebsd-ufs ad4s1  # all rest for /usr
# gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4

But the result is not ready for boot after install the kernel and
system; I allways have to go again with the sysinstall(8) tool to set
the 'A' flag; don't know what I'm missing (and the man page is not very
instructive on this); thanks

PS: next time will try the example of your page, Warren; thx

matthias

-- 
Matthias Apitz
t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211
e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-04 Thread Polytropon

On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 06:40:22 +0200, Matthias Apitz g...@unixarea.de wrote:
 Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
 following sequence:
 
 # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
 # gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
 # gpart create -s bsd ad4s1   # Init with a BSD scheme
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /
 # gpart add -t freebsd-swap -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for swap
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for /var
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /tmp
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs ad4s1  # all rest for /usr
 # gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4

Just a side question that may be interesting for addition
in a new Handbook section:

When you use the old method, you can leave out the slicing
step, creating a dangerously (haha) dedicated disk for
use with FreeBSD. Would this also work with gpart by omitting
the gpart create -s bsd ad4s1 step and then refering to
ad4 instead of ad4s1 in the gpart add -t freebsd-ufs/swap
steps?



 But the result is not ready for boot after install the kernel and
 system; I allways have to go again with the sysinstall(8) tool to set
 the 'A' flag; don't know what I'm missing (and the man page is not very
 instructive on this); thanks

I agree about the manpage; gpart set -a attrib -i index [-f
flags] geom is mentioned in the synopsis, but there's no
further mentioning of the -a option and its parameters.
Maybe (haven't tested!) gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4s1
is equivalent to setting the A flag using sysinstall?





-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:40:22 AM Matthias Apitz wrote:
 Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
 following sequence:
 
 # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
 # gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
 # gpart create -s bsd ad4s1   # Init with a BSD scheme
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /
 # gpart add -t freebsd-swap -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for swap
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for /var
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /tmp
 # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs ad4s1  # all rest for /usr
 # gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4
 
 But the result is not ready for boot after install the kernel and
 system; I allways have to go again with the sysinstall(8) tool to set
 the 'A' flag; don't know what I'm missing (and the man page is not very
 instructive on this); thanks

You need to install the bootcode:

This will install the interactive one:
gpart bootcode -b /mnt2/boot/boot0 ad4

this will install the non-interactive one:
gpart bootcode -b /mnt2/boot/mbr ad4
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:59:44 AM Polytropon wrote:
 On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 06:40:22 +0200, Matthias Apitz g...@unixarea.de wrote:
  Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
  following sequence:
  
  # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
  # gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
  # gpart create -s bsd ad4s1   # Init with a BSD scheme
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /
  # gpart add -t freebsd-swap -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for swap
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for /var
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /tmp
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs ad4s1  # all rest for /usr
  # gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4
 
 Just a side question that may be interesting for addition
 in a new Handbook section:
 
 When you use the old method, you can leave out the slicing
 step, creating a dangerously (haha) dedicated disk for
 use with FreeBSD. Would this also work with gpart by omitting
 the gpart create -s bsd ad4s1 step and then refering to
 ad4 instead of ad4s1 in the gpart add -t freebsd-ufs/swap
 steps?

Yes, that would be the equivalent, but if you do that, you might as well use 
GPT.  The reason you would want to use MBR is to dual boot with another OS 
that only understands MBR.  If you are using certain newer 64bit versions of 
Windows, they understand GPT boot, so the whole BSD inside MBR vs. BSD 
dedicated is becoming moot in my opinion.  A good reference if you must dual 
boot is:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg463525

Also, at the bottom of this page is a list of OSs and GPT support:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table

  But the result is not ready for boot after install the kernel and
  system; I allways have to go again with the sysinstall(8) tool to set
  the 'A' flag; don't know what I'm missing (and the man page is not very
  instructive on this); thanks
 
 I agree about the manpage; gpart set -a attrib -i index [-f
 flags] geom is mentioned in the synopsis, but there's no
 further mentioning of the -a option and its parameters.
 Maybe (haven't tested!) gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4s1
 is equivalent to setting the A flag using sysinstall?

After reexamining the man page I think I see where it could be made more 
clear.  The Examples section at the bottom should be changed into sections, 
one for MBR with BSD inside, one for BSD dedicated, one for GPT, and one for 
VTOC8.

Or at minimum add that you _must_ install bootcode if you wish to boot from 
the disk.  From the confusion above it seems that people think that gpart 
create -s GPT ad0 installs the bootcode, which it does not (replace the GPT 
in my example with MBR, BSD etc).
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?

2011-06-04 Thread Odhiambo Washington

On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 08:03, Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:40:22 AM Matthias Apitz wrote:
  Since some time I'm as well using gpart(8) to setup new systems with the
  following sequence:
 
  # gpart create -s mbr ad4 # Init the disk with an MBR
  # gpart add -t freebsd ad4# Create a BSD container
  # gpart create -s bsd ad4s1   # Init with a BSD scheme
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /
  # gpart add -t freebsd-swap -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for swap
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 2G ad4s1   # 2GB for /var
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs  -s 1G ad4s1   # 1GB for /tmp
  # gpart add -t freebsd-ufs ad4s1  # all rest for /usr
  # gpart set -a active -i 1 ad4
 
  But the result is not ready for boot after install the kernel and
  system; I allways have to go again with the sysinstall(8) tool to set
  the 'A' flag; don't know what I'm missing (and the man page is not very
  instructive on this); thanks

 You need to install the bootcode:

 This will install the interactive one:
 gpart bootcode -b /mnt2/boot/boot0 ad4

 this will install the non-interactive one:
 gpart bootcode -b /mnt2/boot/mbr ad4


This is interesting and here is my question:

Taking the above example from Matthias, assume that I have done everything
including installing the bootcode, then I realize I am not happy with the
scheme and I need to change.
How do I wipe the whole thing in one go so that I can start afresh?

gpart destroy ad4 ??

Why is there no sysinstall-style GUI for gpart?


-- 
Best regards,
Odhiambo WASHINGTON,
Nairobi,KE
+254733744121/+254722743223
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Partitioning with gpart or old style slices?