New option for newfs(3) to make life with GEOM easier
yar at comp.chem.msu.su
Sat Sep 1 02:24:04 PDT 2007
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 08:13:07AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20070901074803.GM85633 at comp.chem.msu.su>, Yar Tikhiy writes:
> >Hi all,
> >With some geom(4) modules saving their metadata in the last sectors
> >of block devices such as disks and partitions,
> 1. If those geom modules do not reduce their providers to prevent
> this metadata from being overwritten, they are buggy.
In some scenarios, it can be desirable to newfs first, geom later.
> 2. Why not simply allow the -s argument to newfs to be negative so
> "-s -200" means "reserve 200 sectors" ?
A negative argument to -s has been invalid till now, so we propose
a new option for people to express their intentions explicitly.
Personally, I don't mind the "-s -200" syntax, but many people
consider overloaded arguments unintuitive and error-prone.
More information about the freebsd-fs