Re: Are BSD partitions not supported?

["Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko" <phcoder@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1603 bytes --]

On 06/01/2010 12:34 PM, Grégoire Sutre wrote:
>
> if   disk->partition is not NULL                /* embedded partition */
>      and
>      disk->partition's partmap is msdos
>      and
>      disk->partition's msdos partition type is NetBSD or OpenBSD
> then
>      interpret BSD label offsets as absolute    /* (a) */
> else
>      interpret BSD label offsets as relative    /* (b) */
For FreeBSD we have to investigate 'c' partition to determine delta.
> fi
>
> In short, the normal interpretation of BSD label offsets would be the
> relative one (b), and we would make an exception to handle NetBSD and
> OpenBSD (a).
The bottom line is: bsdlabel is broken concept. Unless support of
$config is required I would omit it to disencourage further propagation
of broken concepts.
>
> Now, when BSD label offsets are detected absolute (a), should we
> consider them as absolute:
> - w.r.t. to the start of the disk (as is done in the code right now),
>   or
> - w.r.t to the location of the msdos partmap?
> I prefer the second option since it is compatible with dd-ing an entire
> disk into an msdos partition.  Maybe the loopback feature also requires
> the second option (I don't know the internals).
>
Second one is cleaner. But perhaps it's pointless to support such config
since no BSD will be able to bootstrap from such a config
> Grégoire
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>


-- 
Regards
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 294 bytes --]