Fwd: A request for unnested UFS implementation in MBR

Manish Jain jude.obscure at yandex.com
Sat Jul 7 23:24:19 UTC 2018


On 07/08/18 04:44, Polytropon wrote:
> They don't. With GPT, there is no need for BSD labels anymore.

All I am saying is exactly the same possibility for MBR.

We can create a UFS implementation, perhaps named ufs, that gets 
recorded directly in MBR table. Right now the implementation is 
freebsd::freebsd-ufs.

If someone could just touch a few things, it improves things for 
eternity when we do not have bother about the extra layer (BSD). Any 
extra filesystems the user needs should be found in the EBR, not in the BSD.

Why should a PC have multiple nesting schemas ? It only pains the user 
in the future when the need for the extra nest was only in the past 
(when there presumably was no EBR nest).

Tx
MJ


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list