Subject: Re: More on Mac-side stuff
To: Richard Todd <email@example.com>
From: Richard Wackerbarth <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/23/1995 06:23:53
>One *could* do this, but in my opinion, it'd be a significant lose.
>It complicates the partition scheme significantly, and to no good end.
>As it stands now, I can use (and am using) the exact same swap partitions
>for A/UX and NetBSD/mac, and can even mount (read-only) A/UX
>partitions from NetBSD/mac.
>The BSD-partitions-inside-a-single-DOS-partition setup was forced on the
>i386 folks because the native DOS partition scheme was too braindead to
>support what the BSD folks wanted. Those of us whose native platforms have
>more sane partition table schemes, with functionality equal or superior to
>that of the BSD disklabel format (I believe both the Mac and Amiga fall into
>that category), see little reason for such kludges.
I agree. We should not adopt a kludge as our standard when we have a better
Actually, it would be helpful to consider being able to mount EITHER format
of HD on ANY version. IOW, the BSD in DOS style could be mounted as a
foreign file system on a Mac and the Mac HD could be mounted on a 586.