[Thus spake Christian Smith ("CS: ") 4:46pm...]

CS: From: Christian Smith <csmith@micromuse.com>
CS: To: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>,
CS:      Greywolf <greywolf@starwolf.com>
CS: Cc: NetBSD SPARC list <port-sparc@NetBSD.org>
CS: Subject: Re: sysinst problems
CS: Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:46:20 +0000 (GMT)
CS: X-Spam-Level:
CS:
CS: On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Greywolf wrote:
CS:
CS: >[Thus spake der Mouse ("dM: ") 6:19am...]
CS: >
CS: >dM: - The partitioning tool seems semi-broken, in that it refuses to allow
CS: >dM:   partitions to overlap (except for overlap with c).  I had a disk
CS: >dM:   pre-partitioned roughly thus:
CS: >dM:
CS: >dM:     aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa     dddddddddddbbbbbbbbbb
CS: >dM:                                   eeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
CS: >dM:
CS: >dM:   and perhaps I just told it the wrong thing, but it whined about d and
CS: >dM:   e overlapping - I knew they overlapped and I wanted it that way.  I'm
CS: >dM:   quite sure I set both d and e to no-mount.
CS: >
CS: >Yes, please don't try to be smart about this.
CS: >
CS: >I have frequently had need for overlapping partitions so that, depending
CS: >upon the project at hand, I could slice 'n' dice as needed.
CS: >
CS: >[Maybe I really AM a dinosaur for remembering
CS: >
CS: >	aaabbbbbbggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
CS: >	   dddddeeeeeeeeffffffffffff
CS: > :-)
CS: >]
CS:
CS:
CS: How can this possibly be useful?

Outside of the fact that it used to work this way because of much less
malleable disklabels, how about the ability to pre-partition a disk for
different uses at different times?  yes, it looks screwy, and yes, there
is much less perceived need for partitioning these days.  Personally, I
live by partitions.  They make MY life easier.

CS: >I also find it rather obnoxious that fdisk partitions cannot overlap.
CS: >While "user fiendly", I also find it "knowledgeable-user hostile".
CS: >Do we not at least have a force flag that will let me tell fdisk that
CS: >"Yes, I really do want to 'hose' my disk."?
CS:
CS:
CS: I find it rather obnoxious that I can't hose kernel memory, but it is
CS: "user friendly" in that the OS's job is to manage my machine in a way that
CS: is secure and reliable.

Sorry, that's not a fair comparison.  Kernel memory is a hell of a lot
more volatile in that regard.  Disk labels are not wont to change several
(thousand) times a second.

CS: >dM: - When doing unmounted-FS installation, the installer prompts for a
CS: >dM: base directory and a path.  It would help if it gave some indication
CS: >dM: what it means by these; I couldn't figure out what the base directory
CS: >dM: was supposed to be until I saw the pathnames it was trying to use, in
CS: >dM: error messages.
CS:
CS:
CS: Ah yes, it is not exactly clear whether the directory is relative to the
CS: mount point, if I remember correctly.

				--*greywolf;
--
"Yikes!" said Wile E. Coyote.
"Beep! Beep!" said the Road Runner.
"" said the SPARC, not encountering the same errors while compiling X11R5.
[ the Sun 386i was also known as the "Road Runner". ]