>> Try using ufs.  It works fine for me.
>
>Please don't. Though it works, "ufs" has been depreciated in favor of
>ffs. I think some of the fsck problems we've encountered have been due
>to fsck -p not liking ufs partitions. "ufs" works as /sbin/mount_ffs
>and /sbin/mount_ufs are the same file. :-)

Yeah, I noticed this recently while restoring a snapshot.  Mount_ufs is a
link to mount_ffs.  I -did- manage to get my "g" mounted, but then I tried
to use an "i", which Allen has told me won't work w/o kernel changes.  I
suspect this would be a minimal change, but I've got to get things stable
enough to trust the disk structure first, which I don't.

When I, running mkfs 1.45, do the newfs thing from the MacOS, I find that
the results are less than stable.  I can, from MacBSD, run newfs and clean
up my "g" partition, but cleaning up the "a" partition is a problem I
haven't solved yet.

To explain: when I first looked at the "g" partition after mounting it for
the first time, I found it was 40% used.  This was according to "df".
After dismounting, "fsck"ing, and remounting, I found the numbers went to
what they should be, namely 0% used.  However, fsck'ing the root partition
gives various numbers at various times.  Obviously, I can't newfs it from
MacBSD since I'm -running- from it, and I have no other disks I'm willing
to partition for this software considering the feeling I have for the file
system software we're using.  I'm seeing if I can get a better look at
what's going on.

Howard S Shubs         hshubs@bix.com
The Denim Adept        hshubs@mindspring.com