|Burton Sampley||Mar 13, 1998 12:39 pm|
|Burton Sampley||Mar 14, 1998 7:54 am|
|Robert Watson||Mar 14, 1998 10:06 am|
|Michael V. Harding||Mar 14, 1998 11:04 am|
|Robert Watson||Mar 14, 1998 11:12 am|
|Burton Sampley||Mar 14, 1998 12:11 pm|
|Robert Watson||Mar 14, 1998 2:53 pm|
|Jordan K. Hubbard||Mar 14, 1998 4:10 pm|
|Jordan K. Hubbard||Mar 14, 1998 4:11 pm|
|Robert Watson||Mar 14, 1998 4:14 pm|
|Jordan K. Hubbard||Mar 14, 1998 4:33 pm|
|Greg Shenaut||Mar 14, 1998 5:27 pm|
|Studded||Mar 14, 1998 7:19 pm||.comproot|
|Mike Smith||Mar 14, 1998 8:09 pm|
|Chad R. Larson||Mar 15, 1998 12:16 am|
|Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group||Mar 15, 1998 10:46 am|
|Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group||Mar 15, 1998 10:57 am|
|Mike Smith||Mar 15, 1998 2:19 pm|
|Robert Watson||Mar 15, 1998 2:27 pm|
|Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group||Mar 16, 1998 8:01 am|
|Subject:||Re: More problems with new slice code|
|From:||Robert Watson (rob...@cyrus.watson.org)|
|Date:||Mar 14, 1998 2:53:58 pm|
On Sat, 14 Mar 1998, Burton Sampley wrote:
To the best of my knowledge (if I'm wrong, will someone please correct me), the entries are not deleted, they just become invalid, ie, they *act* like they point to /dev/null or somewhere in outerspace. I have been bitten by this in the past and have been quickly educated in the use of the fixit floppy/CDROM, which is actually a really cool tool to have! The pair have saved my butt a few times. It seems kinda odd when I explicitly give "/dev/MAKEDEV sd0s2a" (and the rest of my file systems individually) that it does what it needs to do to allow me to use that slice successfully, but "/dev/MAKEDEV all" makes the same slice no longer function.
That is what puzzled me, actually. The device names were really gone from /dev -- /dev/wd0a which had been happily there just sort of disappeared after I did a MAKEDEV of the new devices. I haven't looked enough at the MAKEDEV script to know its depths though.
I believe this has been corrected in -current, but I probably have my facts wrong.
I think all of us a one point in time have been a member of the head-scratching club. That's part of the fun of using FreeBSD. I just have a bad habit of learning at the worst possible time, like blowing up my system without a backup and all of my code for the quarter being on the unaccessible hard drive the week before finals. :-)
Oh, I would certainly rather deal with just about any head-scratchy moments in FreeBSD than run anything else. We have over 8 machines running FreeBSD of various forms in our apartment, and I do all development for work under FreeBSD. :) On the other hand, while I was bitten by this bug, and knew how to deal with it, I pity a more novice user who gets in that situation. There are, of course, risks to running -STABLE, but as it is currently a release candidate, we should try to minimize those risks. Having poked about at the code a bit where the changes were, I accept that they were simplifying and helpful; it is unfortunate, however, that the correction they provide to the code has some side-effects. sysinstall under 2.2.6 should definitely know how to deal with this config and auto-magically do it (or request confirmation first, but notify the user :).
Robert N Watson
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message