Re: 8.0-RC2 mangles msdosfs

On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 18:46 +0100, Alexander Best wrote:
> Paul G Webster schrieb am 2009-11-03:
> > As an example, this is a 1GB fat32 disk.
> 
> 
> > da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
> > da0: <LG USB Drive 1100> Removable Direct Access SCSI-0 device
> > da0: 1.000MB/s transfers
> > da0: 956MB (1957888 512 byte sectors: 64H 32S/T 956C)
> > desktop1# ls /dev | grep da0~
> > desktop1# ls /dev | grep da0
> > da0
> > desktop1# fdisk /dev/da0
> > ******* Working on device /dev/da0 *******
> > parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are:
> > cylinders=956 heads=64 sectors/track=32 (2048 blks/cyl)
> 
> > parameters to be used for BIOS calculations are:
> > cylinders=956 heads=64 sectors/track=32 (2048 blks/cyl)
> 
> > Media sector size is 512
> > Warning: BIOS sector numbering starts with sector 1
> > Information from DOS bootblock is:
> > The data for partition 1 is:
> > sysid 114 (0x72),(unknown)
> >    start 778135908, size 1141509631 (557377 Meg), flag 6f
> >         beg: cyl 357/ head 116/ sector 40;
> >         end: cyl 357/ head 32/ sector 45
> > The data for partition 2 is:
> > sysid 101 (0x65),(Novell Netware/386 3.xx)
> >    start 168689522, size 1936028240 (945326 Meg), flag 69
> >         beg: cyl 288/ head 115/ sector 43;
> >         end: cyl 367/ head 114/ sector 50
> > The data for partition 3 is:
> > sysid 121 (0x79),(QNX4.x 3rd part)
> >    start 1869881465, size 1936028192 (945326 Meg), flag 73
> >         beg: cyl 366/ head 32/ sector 33;
> >         end: cyl 357/ head 32/ sector 43
> > The data for partition 4 is:
> > sysid 13 (0x0d),(unknown)
> >    start 0, size 3637226496 (1775989 Meg), flag 74
> >         beg: cyl 372/ head 97/ sector 50;
> >         end: cyl 0/ head 10/ sector 0
> > desktop1#
> 
> *lol* just tried this myself and my fdisk output looks just as bad as yours:
> 
> ******* Working on device da0 *******
> parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are:
> cylinders=242 heads=255 sectors/track=63 (16065 blks/cyl)
> 
> parameters to be used for BIOS calculations are:
> cylinders=242 heads=255 sectors/track=63 (16065 blks/cyl)
> 
> Media sector size is 512
> Warning: BIOS sector numbering starts with sector 1
> Information from DOS bootblock is:
> The data for partition 1 is:
> sysid 110 (0x6e),(unknown)
>     start 1768187213, size 1701211749 (830669 Meg), flag 65
>         beg: cyl 357/ head 114/ sector 46;
>         end: cyl 10/ head 255/ sector 13
> The data for partition 2 is:
> sysid 255 (0xff),(Xenix bad blocks table)
>     start 1953723749, size 980709985 (478862 Meg), flag 68
>         beg: cyl 370/ head 108/ sector 37;
>         end: cyl 78/ head 13/ sector 10
> The data for partition 3 is:
> sysid 116 (0x74),(unknown)
>     start 1801683314, size 168652389 (82349 Meg), flag 20
>         beg: cyl 371/ head 84/ sector 33;
>         end: cyl 100/ head 101/ sector 32
> The data for partition 4 is:
> sysid 0 (0000),(unused)
>     start 2885681152, size 54212 (26 Meg), flag 0
>         beg: cyl 0/ head 0/ sector 0;
>         end: cyl 0/ head 0/ sector 0
> 
> `file -s /dev/da0` reports:
> 
> /dev/da0: x86 boot sector, Microsoft Windows XP Bootloader (4.german) NTLDR,
> code offset 0x58, OEM-ID "MSDOS5.0", sectors/cluster 8, reserved sectors 38,
> Media descriptor 0xf8, heads 255, sectors 3903487 (volumes > 32 MB) , FAT (32
> bit), sectors/FAT 3805, serial number 0x88e88370, unlabeled
> 
> `fdisk` in general seems to need some updates. this is the output if i call
> `fdisk` without any args:

The important question is what does "gpart show" say about these
disks....

robert.

> fdisk: mounted root fs resource doesn't match expectations (regexec returned
> 1)
> 
> alex
> 
> > On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:28:10 -0000, Mark Linimon
> > <linimon_at_lonesome.com>  wrote:
> 
> > >On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:03:29AM +0100, Alexander Best wrote:
> > >>i guess the freebsd-fs_at_ guys know about these problems but don't
> > >>have
> > >>the time to deal with it.  most of them are probably working on
> > >>zfs.
> 
> > >AFAIK there are only a handful of people working on ZFS.
> 
> > >We certainly need more people willing to work on filesystems code.
> > >In
> > >general it does have a large learning curve, so it's not as
> > >attractive
> > >as some of the other areas.  That's probably why, as the kernel has
> > >undergone radical changes (e.g. for SMP) over time, that some of the
> > >fs code has not kept up.
> 
> > >mcl
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> > >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> > >To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> > >"freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"
> 
> 
> 
> > --
> > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"
-- 
Robert Noland <rnoland_at_FreeBSD.org>
FreeBSD