Is there anyone interested in rewriting that "fake" partition table,
or is that requirement satisfied by the non-dedicated format?
I actually like sysinstall, now that I am used to it, but it
would be aesthetically more pleasing to be able to use the
dedicated format. I am curious if there
Glendon Gross:
Is there anyone interested in rewriting that "fake" partition table,
Please look at the thread with the same topic three weeks ago.
I stated that it wouldn't be possible because there is a fundamental
disagreement:
BIOS standard demands that the first *sector* always remains
Please correct me if I am wrong, but this discussion seems to revolve
around a problem that results from nonstandard BIOS routines.
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Lehey writes:
: No it isn't bogus. You can't boot off a DD disk on some machines
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 06:43:33AM +0100, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
can someone remember me the problem w/ DD ?
Geez, we've just had a 30 message thread that stated many times the
problem with dang.ded. drives.
well, I don't have tested anything since I don't have any free drive to burn,
but
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Has it occured to you that perhaps there are people that really, really
want DD?
can someone remember me the problem w/ DD ? I guess that DD a drive is not
a problem if done w/in the state of the art (or something like that).
- what about to fdisk the destination
On 20 Nov, Mike Smith wrote:
Let me state this one more time loudly for those calling themselves boot
code experts. THE PARTITION TABLE IN THE MBR IS NOT DEALT WITH BY THE BIOS,
BIOSES THAT TRY TO MAKE HEADS OR TALES OF PARTITION TABLES ARE TECHNICALLY
BROKEN AND VIOLATE IBM AT
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Lehey writes:
On Sunday, 19 November 2000 at 23:57:25 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 02:53:04PM +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
If it shows valid partitions, you're using a Microsoft partition table.
Greg Lehey wrote:
On Sunday, 19 November 2000 at 23:57:25 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 02:53:04PM +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
If it shows valid partitions, you're using a Microsoft partition table.
^
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Lehey writes:
: They waste space. In most cases, they're not needed. Isn't that
: enough?
No. Writing in 'C' isn't necesary and wastes space. That, in and of
itself, isn't a reason to not use it.
But like mike said, it was the ability to create these for
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Daniel O'Connor" writes:
: At least remove the option from sysinstall so new users don't get
: stuck with it.
I strongly support this. It has burned me on several machines.
I don't think that anyone will remove it from the kernel...
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send
Greg Lehey wrote:
Why is DD ever _needed_?
Because Microsoft partition tables waste space.
That's a really weak argument, given the price and size of drives nowadays.
Jim
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
On Sunday, 19 November 2000 at 18:50:40 -0600, Jim King wrote:
Greg Lehey wrote:
Why is DD ever _needed_?
Because Microsoft partition tables waste space.
That's a really weak argument, given the price and size of drives
nowadays.
It's a matter of principle. Why waste?
Greg
--
Finger
On Sunday, 19 November 2000 at 17:48:14 -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Lehey writes:
They waste space. In most cases, they're not needed. Isn't that
enough?
No. Writing in 'C' isn't necesary and wastes space. That, in and of
itself, isn't a reason to not use
On Sunday, 19 November 2000 at 17:50:48 -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Daniel O'Connor" writes:
At least remove the option from sysinstall so new users don't get
stuck with it.
I strongly support this. It has burned me on several machines.
I don't think that
On 20-Nov-00 Greg Lehey wrote:
OK, the more this thread continues, the more it's looking as if we're
talking about different things. I don't have (much) of an objection
to removing it from sysinstall. If that's all we're talking about, I
don't have any further objections. But I still
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Lehey writes:
: I wonder how long the current Microsoft partition table has to live,
: anyway? Sooner or later people are going to have to move to LBA
: addressing, or disks will get so big that the partition table can't
: address them. Then, hopefully, we'll
16 matches
Mail list logo
