> >  >> Which is preferable?
> > 
> >  Chris> Assuming it can be made to work reliably, the latter (what you're
> >  Chris> calling the "first method"), since it provides all the funcitionaly of
> >  Chris> the "second method," and more.
> > 
> > Yes, but adds complexity. I think balance of benefit and cost is
> > important. If 'file system sector size != disklabel sector size'
> > situation is not required, "second method" is recommended for it's
> > simplicity(but not interesting :-).
> 
> OK, I wasn't clear on what changes, exactly, had to be made in each
> case.
> 
> In this case, i'd say "avoid modifying the FS code where possible, and
> require that fs sector size == disklabel sector size."

I think fs sector size != disklabel sector size is useful if one
needs to have two or more different FS on one disk (like normal FS and
CD image).

-- 
Zdenek Salvet                                              salvet@ics.muni.cz 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           If God had meant for us to be in the Army,
         we would have been born with green, baggy skin.