Subject: Re: mkfs should clear possible alternate superblocks
To: David Laight <email@example.com>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/10/2003 17:37:38
Thus spake David Laight ("DL> ") sometime Today...
DL> From: David Laight <email@example.com>
DL> Cc: tech-userlevel@NetBSD.org
DL> Subject: Re: mkfs should clear possible alternate superblocks
DL> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:46:19 +0100
DL> On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:21:13PM +0000, Martin J. Laubach wrote:
DL> > | > NetBSD over a previously NetBSD-raided drive, and the initial boot
DL> > | > after installation got very confused because it thought the filesystem
DL> > | > was still raided?
DL> > |
DL> > | For FFSv2 it won't and the raid header will be intact.
DL> > | So maybe the raid magic number needs adding to the list that get zapped.
DL> > So instead of hard coding a gazillion magic sector numbers
DL> > to be zapped, why does newfs not just take the easy way and zero
DL> > out the first 255 or so sectors?
DL> Because they contain the boot code.
1. In every filesystem?
2. Doesn't newfs skip the MBR and the disklabel?
3. Which boot code, primary, secondary or tertiary? [I'm guessing
NetBSD: Two guys with a vax.