Polytropon wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 13:09:22 -0500, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
Good. Except that in FreeBSD land you are talking about a slice table.
To carry things forward consistently, the partition table is within
a slice and describes FreeBSD partitions a..h (and more now I
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Randi Harper ra...@freebsd.org wrote:
I'm going to just reply to all of these at once.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 07:59:42AM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM,
On 11/28/09, Peggy Wilkins enli...@gmail.com wrote:
Can someone elaborate on what exactly this statement in the 8.0
detailed release notes means?
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/relnotes-detailed.html#FS
2.2.5 File Systems
“dangerously dedicated” mode for the UFS file system is no
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 08:34:05PM -0800, Randi Harper wrote:
I'm going to just reply to all of these at once.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 07:59:42AM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Peggy
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
Some of the responses have said that UFS handling of 'Dangerously
dedicated' has not gone away, just sysinstall handling of it.
That may be true and if that is true, then you can probably still
access dangerously dedicated
On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 09:48:05AM -0800, Randi Harper wrote:
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
Some of the responses have said that UFS handling of 'Dangerously
dedicated' has not gone away, just sysinstall handling of it.
That may be true and if that
On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 10:30:10AM -0500, Bob Johnson wrote:
On 11/28/09, Peggy Wilkins enli...@gmail.com wrote:
Can someone elaborate on what exactly this statement in the 8.0
detailed release notes means?
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/relnotes-detailed.html#FS
2.2.5 File
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 13:09:22 -0500, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
Good. Except that in FreeBSD land you are talking about a slice table.
To carry things forward consistently, the partition table is within
a slice and describes FreeBSD partitions a..h (and more now I guess).
Only in
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 08:34:05PM -0800, Randi Harper wrote:
I'm going to just reply to all of these at once.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 07:59:42AM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Peggy Wilkins wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Peggy Wilkins enli...@gmail.com wrote:
Can someone elaborate on what exactly this statement in the 8.0
detailed release notes means?
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/relnotes-detailed.html#FS
2.2.5 File Systems
“dangerously dedicated” mode for the UFS
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 07:59:42AM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Peggy Wilkins enli...@gmail.com wrote:
Can someone elaborate on what exactly this statement in the 8.0
detailed release notes means?
I'm going to just reply to all of these at once.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 07:59:42AM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Peggy Wilkins enli...@gmail.com wrote:
Due to history I won't go into, all
Did you see all the mailing list chatter about new installations
failing due to sysinstall not being able to newfs device names that
didn't exist? This is related. Also, a partition table isn't just a
partition table. It's a little more complex than that. It has
*nothing* to do with the
Can someone elaborate on what exactly this statement in the 8.0
detailed release notes means?
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/relnotes-detailed.html#FS
2.2.5 File Systems
“dangerously dedicated” mode for the UFS file system is no longer supported.
Important: Such disks will need to be
14 matches
Mail list logo
