Re: Memstick image differences between 8.x and 9.x

From: Matt Thyer <matt.thyer_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 11:49:59 +1030
On Oct 9, 2011 11:04 AM, "Nathan Whitehorn" <nwhitehorn_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On 10/08/11 19:25, Matt Thyer wrote:
>>
>> I believe this is actually a case of the memstick image being an
improperly
>> formatted GPT as there is no backup partition table at the end of the
>> volume.
>>
>> The only sensible answer is to not use GPT for the memstick image.
>>
>> I've not said this loud enough yet but this is a show stopper for
>> 9.0-RELEASE and must be fixed.
>>
>> We can't have a major release that modern systems cannot install with one
of
>> the now most popular install methods.
>>
>> As a first step, Andriy Gapon has provided a quick patch for makefs(8) so
it
>> can create filesystems with UFS labels (as bsdinstall relys on labels).
>>
>> If you want to fix your memstick, create a copy of the partition table at
>> the end of the volume and it should boot.
>
>
> It is being fixed, pending Andriy's change getting into the tree, which
should be soon, and will end up being used for the next build (which I
believe is RC1).
>
> There is also the interesting question of actually installing to GPT on
the hard disk, which is the default in 9.0. Does this not work on some
systems? If so, do we want to blacklist them and use a different default
partition scheme? Can we identify systems that violate regular PC boot
standards and reject GPT? Any data on any of these points would be
appreciated.
> -Nathan
>
I don't think there have been any reports of failure to boot properly
formatted GPT yet.
Received on Sat Oct 08 2011 - 23:20:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:18 UTC