Re: [issue762] missing 's0' in device use

[Sascha Wildner <saw@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thomas Nikolajsen wrote:
> Thomas Nikolajsen <thomas.nikolajsen@mail.dk> added the comment:
>
> I have looked into this; think I'm finished for now.
>
> New patches attached:
>  - vnconfig(8)
> forgot one place in prev. patch.

Committed.

>  - ccd(4), ccdconfig(8)
> tested, not just guessing.

Committed.

>  - disklabel(8)
> I have called 's0' for 'compatibility slice',
> other (w/ positive slice number) 'normal slice'.
> Terms used was: 'base disk/raw disk' and 'slice';
> this had to change if 's0' is called a slice, which seems natural.
> I'm not sure s0 always technically is a compatibility slice;
> eg. for vn0s0 or ccd0s0; if other terms should be used,
> give me a hint or just change it.
> Also first disklabel example is changes a bit:
> a ccd partition is added (we don't use 4.2BSD for that any more),
> and an error is fixed: sizes and offsets didn't add up correctly.

Uh, I looked into this for some time and ended up frustrated. For 
example, shouldn't it then also be

disklabel [-r] slice

instead of

disklabel [-r] disk

??

I'm kinda confused over adjusting disklabel.8.

>  - disklabel64(5), disklabel64(8)
> Minimal changes: just to show disklabel64; not 'disklabel'

Committed.

>  - vinum(4), vinum(8)
> This isn't tested yet; will do that.

Not committed. Is this tested yet?

> I came to think about that information on changed disk device use,
> is only in /usr/src/UPDATING, which isn't on release CD.
> I think easiest solution would be to just copy UPDATING to root of CD.

Yea, that would be a good thing.

Sascha

--
http://yoyodyne.ath.cx