Message-Id: <199603152032.PAA10150@glacier.MIT.EDU>
To: "Gordon W. Ross" <gwr@mc.com>
Cc: mycroft@NetBSD.ORG, perry@piermont.com, netbsd-developers@NetBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: NetBSD/i386 trashed my FDISK table! 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 15 Mar 1996 14:13:03 EST."
             <9603151913.AA07553@bach> 
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 15:32:40 EST
From: Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU>
Sender: owner-netbsd-developers@NetBSD.ORG
Precedence: first-class

> I can't believe what I found in i386/disksubr.c (yikes!)  That
> business about copying FDISK slots into the netbsd label is pretty
> bogus - if I want to make partitions matching the FDISK ones, I can
> do that, but readdisklabel should not.  The knowledge of FAT types
> is completely bogus too...

So, I just checked this code in a little while after posting to
port-i386 about it and waiting for objections.  I also talked with
mycroft about it, and he indicated that copying MBR partitions onto
the default disklabel was fine (as long as it wouldn't affect a disk
with a real disklabel).  The intention is to allow you to mount DOS
partitions on a disk with no NetBSD partitions; previously there was
no way of doing this short of introducing an in-core disklabel at boot
time.

Please explain why you think this behavior is bogus?