boot0cfg -s vs. GEOM_PART_*?

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <9FE792C6-8560-4C64-BD74-CD70DF5EBBF5 at mac.com>, Marcel Moolenaar wri
tes:

>That won't be as easy as boot0cfg. Both fdisk and bsdlabel
>do all partitioning operations in memory and then expect to
>dump/write the blob. This is not how gpart works, so there's
>a mismatch in paradigm.

The reason for that modus operandi, was that the kernel
only needed code to read the metadata, the software that
formatted and wrote the metadata could be contained
entirely in userland thus not bloating the kernel.

Your choice is legit as well, with today RAM sizes I doubt
the difference is measureable.

But not updating boot0cfg to support the new API got you
a bad mark in my book.

I would prefer if fdisk and bsdlabel also kept working
or at least gave some guidance on what to do.

Poul-Henning

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.