Okay, I'm catching up on mail.  Sue me. :)

While really really bored, Phil Knaack wrote:
> I'm currently using OS-BS 2.0 beta 8 .. (and HOW long has it been 
> 'beta'? :) and it works well. Unfortunately, I think OS-BS 2.0 uses
> a little more of the disk than the previous version; i.e., I have been
> unable to get a NetBSD disklabel and OS-BS to exist at the same time.
> If I disklabel the disk in order to access my DOS partitions from 
> netbsd, it nukes OS-BS and will no longer boot. If I then reinstall
> OS-BS it nukes the disklabel and I can no longer access the DOS 
> partitions from NetBSD.
> My question is this: would bteasy work better for me? Can anybody 
> confirm this nifty annoying property of OS-BS?

I believe you have your partitions set up improperly.
Mine look like:
part'n 0: sysid 6 (MSDOS) : start 32, ....  (0:1:1) (c:h:s)
...
part'n 3: sysid 165 (NetBSD) : start 372736, ....

Note that I leave a whole track for the boot manager.  The secondary bootstrap
and disklabel stuff is done into your Unix "a" partition... that is, way away
from the beginning of the disk - in my case, 372736 sectors in.
What may be confusing you is that certain utilities will write "default"
stuff occasionally.  I personally goofed several times over not providing
-B to disklabel at the same time I am writing the label with the -w option.
I intend to write a doc on this one day.  In fact, it's almost done :)
-- 
VaX#n8 (vak-sa-nate) - n, CS senior++ and Unix junkie - vax@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
Deal with evil through strength, yet encourage good through trust.    - PGP me