Joerg Schilling wrote:
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is a difference though as far as I can tell. Sometimes on Solaris
we have p? for fdisk partitioning included and sometimes we don't;
similarly we sometimes don't have t? for target. Personally I'd prefer
us to be consistent always even if it leads to names like
/dev/dsk/c0t0d0p0s0 if we are talking about the first Solaris VTOC slice
c0t0d0 for the whole disk c0t0d0p0 for the whole Solaris VTOC.
This is a sore point in OpenSolaris....
The fact that the kernel does make implicit assumptions on the way FDISK
has to be interpretet (e.g. only one Solaris FDISK partition) prevents
us to use some of the disks created on Linux
Been there, done that!
Then there is the issue of referencing FAT filesystems in size Windows
Extended partitions which would give rise to stuff like this
/dev/dsk/c0t0d0p0:1 at the moment :-) which is only really understood by
pcfs.
Did you ever try to tell someone howto mount a specific FDISK partition
(in case that expended partitions are in use) wihout asking him to
use the try and error system?
Too many times!
--
Darren J Moffat
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
