Re: remove sparse check in vnd

2011-02-06 Thread David Holland
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:07:13PM -0500, der Mouse wrote: Of course, still better would be to fix vnd, though I'm not sure what the right fix would be. What's the problem? My vague understanding was that you could get into deadlocks allocating blocks, but maybe I'm confusing it with

Re: turning off COMPAT_386BSD_MBRPART in disklabel

2011-02-06 Thread David Holland
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 08:04:26AM +, David Laight wrote: The PR rather leads to the conclusion that the support for old Partition IDs in disklabel(8) is suboptimal. Originally, the code did only consider a partition with the old ID if no new one was found. This apparently got

Re: remove sparse check in vnd

2011-02-06 Thread YAMAMOTO Takashi
hi, On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:07:13PM -0500, der Mouse wrote: Of course, still better would be to fix vnd, though I'm not sure what the right fix would be. What's the problem? My vague understanding was that you could get into deadlocks allocating blocks, but maybe I'm confusing it

Re: turning off COMPAT_386BSD_MBRPART in disklabel

2011-02-06 Thread Thor Lancelot Simon
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 05:07:51AM +, David Holland wrote: Are *our* ancient disklabels partition-relative? It's so long ago that I'm not sure... but the code in currently in disklabel(8) doesn't appear to know anything at all about partition-relative labels. They are not. This was a

Re: remove sparse check in vnd

2011-02-06 Thread Thor Lancelot Simon
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 04:58:16AM +, David Holland wrote: On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:07:13PM -0500, der Mouse wrote: Of course, still better would be to fix vnd, though I'm not sure what the right fix would be. What's the problem? My vague understanding was that you could get into