From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1OLJIK-0005UC-6Q for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:05:56 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35399 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OLJIG-0005JG-3w for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:05:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLJI3-0007vQ-F0 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:05:40 -0400 Received: from iona.labri.fr ([147.210.8.143]:34690) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLJI2-0007uy-WA for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:05:39 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by iona.labri.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A0736B79 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 19:05:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at labri.fr Received: from iona.labri.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (iona.labri.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with LMTP id 5-enUsNpLKfG for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 19:05:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.50] (c2433-1-88-160-112-182.fbx.proxad.net [88.160.112.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by iona.labri.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8023A36B75 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 19:05:36 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4C0BD561.5040607@labri.fr> Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 19:05:37 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?R3LDqWdvaXJlIFN1dHJl?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100411 Icedove/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The development of GNU GRUB References: <4BF2DE4F.7070209@gmail.com> <4BF2F68E.8090906@gmail.com> <4BF42759.1010503@gmail.com> <4BF43302.6080106@gmail.com> <4BF43A0A.80801@gmail.com> <4BF8FA66.5060702@gmail.com> <4C042719.4050907@gmail.com> <4C04E245.1040607@gmail.com> <4C04ED20.7070203@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4C04ED20.7070203@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Subject: Re: Are BSD partitions not supported? X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 17:05:54 -0000 On 06/01/2010 01:21 PM, Vladimir '=CF=86-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > For FreeBSD we have to investigate 'c' partition to determine delta. Right. >> 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. I am not sure I understand what you mean here. Regarding bsdlabel: it is not broken by itself. The problem comes from the fact that several OSes use it as (native) disklabel, but do not interpret the fields in the same way. I guess it's easier to maintain coherence when the disklabel is used (natively) by a single OS. >> 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 entir= e >> disk into an msdos partition. Maybe the loopback feature also require= s >> the second option (I don't know the internals). >> > Second one is cleaner. But perhaps it's pointless to support such confi= g > since no BSD will be able to bootstrap from such a config You could at least boot the kernel from such a config. And, for NetBSD, I believe that the use of wedges should allow the kernel to mount the root file system (but I'm not an expert on wedges), provided that grub gives the wedge information in the bootinfo structure. Gr=C3=A9goire