search for: bsdlabel

...hree 40GB to replace actual system (ad[023]). Plan was simple: 1. csup freebsd-stable 2. follow the tuning guide for zfs, rebuild world, kernel, and follow system upgrade 3. Reboot in single user mode 4. fdisk new disks with sysinstall using one big slice for every disk 5. bsdlabel every new disk with sysinstall using: 1GB for /, 512MB for swap, and rest unused (for ZFS) 6. gmirror -n -v -b round-robin boot ad0s1a ad2s1a ad3s1a 7. newfs /dev/mirror/boot 8. mount /dev/mirror/boot /mnt && cd /mnt 9. dump -h 0 -L -f - -C 32 / | restore rf - 10. zp...

...nd: cyl 340/ head 254/ sector 63 The data for partition 4 is: sysid 165 (0xa5),(FreeBSD/NetBSD/386BSD) start 71280405, size 124086060 (60588 Meg), flag 80 (active) beg: cyl 341/ head 0/ sector 1; end: cyl 896/ head 254/ sector 63 but when was time to label it, I did it wrong: bsdlabel -w da0 should have aimed slice 2 now, I just get da0 on /dev and sysinstall only sees da0 also. but fdisk sees it all (as showed above) how can I erase all label info from da0 (not da0s1 or da0s2). I tried to rewrite fdisk and all mbr info, but label info is still there. I'd like not to ha...

...GE} # Create the file where the image will reside. mdconfig -a -t vnode -f /mnt/${FSIMAGE} -u 0 # Create the image itself fdisk -BI md0 # Write the DOS partition table # Create an inital BSD Label # For testing, we''ll assume one large partition bsdlabel -w -B md0s1 bsdlabel -e md0s1 # Change partition a from ''unused'' to ''4.2BSD'' newfs -O1 /dev/md0s1a # UFS, because pygrub doesn''t grok UFS2 # Mount up the image and do the installation mount /dev/md0s1a /media # Perform the installation to the disk imag...

....5-PRERELEASE server in production, booting from ad0s1: # BLOCKSIZE=512 swapinfo Device 512-blocks Used Avail Capacity /dev/ad0s1b 2097152 52872 2044280 3% /dev/ad1s1b 2097152 51952 2045200 2% Total 4194304 104824 4089480 2% # bsdlabel ad0s1 | fgrep b: b: 2097152 0 swap Previously, on a 4.11 system, swapinfo said that swap size was less than size of b: partition on a slice - it was ok, as boot sectors are located at beginning of slice. But now, sizes match exactly. What changed and is it dangerous nowadays to hav...

Hi, Somehow[TM] an installation of 4.11 to ad0s3 managed to wipe out my existing disklabel for 7.0 on ad0s4. I now need to recover the disklabel to get my system to boot! There were three labels - ad0s4a: UFS, exact size unknown. Is it possible to infer this from the UFS partition size? I can mount this already, as I simply wrote an 'a' label of maximum size to the disklabel - ad0s4b:

...of my slices as ext2 (I currently mask the partition type as ISO9660(!) and use a *patched* grub, so you see this situation is suboptimal...), but the disklabel program will not honor this (neither numerically, i.e. 17, nor textual which I know from the source). I don't know about the -CURRENT bsdlabel, I suppose things are the same. Is there any serious objection to supporting this? Regards Thomas

I have previously written about a mountroot prompt, here are some details. I have a system with an asus m3a78-emh hdmi board, a 74 gig raptor drive, and a dual core amd am2 cpu. I have had this result with both the amd64 and i386 systems. My steps were all conducted today as follows. install 7.0 release run freebsd-update get src tree build world build and install kernel reboot and be greeted

Hi, We bought a new Dell PowerEdge 2950III with Perc 6/i and have the disk geometry problem using 6.3 final or 7.0 RC1. Seems that we are not alone at least one guy has similar problem reported earlier: http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/questions/2008-01/msg00506.html I was reading the mailing list and found that some of the people are happily using this hardware with the latest

So, I've long known and it makes sense that when you're booted from a ZFS volume, you can't mess with the boot-loader. And, I know a few months ago I had a set of commands I would use when booted from a CD that would initialize the network and copy the "release/boot" from somewhere else so that I could install bootblocks and boot-loaders from more recent code. Sadly, I

...ELI using two-factor authentication - passphrase plus keyfile on USB drive. FreeBSD is installed on ad0s2.eli and first slice is not used by this system so let's say that I've got a full disk encryption. Now my question - is it safe to keep backup of encrypted disk's label (dump of bsdlabel /dev/ad0s2.eli) on the same USB drive with keyfile? Information about partitions itself is not important for me, I don't feel like I have to keep it secret, but is it any advantage to attacker if she get her hands not only on keyfile but also on unencrypted BSD label and then gain access to...

...15200 In my kernel configuration file I have: options CONSPEED=115200 I have rebuilt and installed world and the kernel. In /etc/ttys I have ttyd0 "/usr/libexec/getty std.115200" vt100 on secure I have also re-installed the bootstrap code: cd /usr/src/sys/boot make install bsdlabel -B bootPartition In /boot/loader.conf I have boot_multicon="YES" boot_serial="YES" comconsole_speed="115200" console="vidconsole,comconsole" Kind regards, Geoff

...// The kernel used 6.2 GENERIC load -t mfs_root /image // dd if=/dev/zero of=/image bs=1k count=100k (or count=99k) } above config can't boot normal, kernel panic. [TEST after system up] 1. dd if=/dev/zero of=/image bs=1k count=128k 2. mdconfig -a -t vnode -f /image -u 0 3. bsdlabel -Bw /dev/md0 auto 4. newfs /dev/md0a 5. mount /dev/md0a /mnt When system up normally: df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a 23G 1.5G 20G 7% / devfs 1.0K 1.0K 0B 100% /dev /dev/md0a 124M 4.0K 114M...

...tquery 5M /rescue/rtsol 5M /rescue/savecore 5M /rescue/spppcontrol 5M /rescue/swapon 5M /rescue/sysctl 5M /rescue/tunefs 5M /rescue/umount 5M /rescue/atmconfig 5M /rescue/ping6 5M /rescue/ipf 5M /rescue/zfs 5M /rescue/zpool 5M /rescue/bsdlabel 5M /rescue/disklabel 5M /rescue/fdisk 5M /rescue/dhclient 5M /rescue/head 5M /rescue/mt 5M /rescue/sed 5M /rescue/tail 5M /rescue/tee 5M /rescue/gzip 5M /rescue/gunzip 5M /rescue/gzcat 5M /rescue/zcat 5M /rescue/bzip2 5M /rescue/...

On 12/4/13, 9:05 AM, Mark Felder said: ----------------- > There was no alternative; we couldn't keep BIND in base. BIND 9 will > certainly have a EoL before the EoL of FreeBSD 10.x, and we can't use > BIND 10 because it requires importing Python to base. I'm coming more and more to the conclusion that we should have a minimal Python in "base". More and more people

...l 26624000 Apr 27 03:28 6.2-RELEASE-i386-bootonly.img -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 25444352 Apr 16 15:44 6.2-RELEASE-i386-bootonly.iso - Attach this image file as a memory disk: # mdconfig -a -t vnode -f 6.2-RELEASE-i386-bootonly.img -u 0 - Write a BSD label with boot code to it: # bsdlabel -w -B md0 auto - And create a filesystem on it (BSD uses ufs): # newfs -m 0 md0a Warning: changing optimization to space because minfree is less than 8% /dev/md0a: 25.4MB (51984 sectors) block size 16384, fragment size 2048 using 4 cylinder groups of 6.36MB, 407 blks, 832...

I had a single spare 500GB HDD and I decided to install a FreeBSD file server in it for learning purposes, and I moved almost all of my data to it. Yesterday, and naturally after no longer having backups of the data in the server, I had a controller failure (SiS 180 (oh, the quality)) and the HDD was considered unplugged. When I noticed a few checksum failures on `zfs status` (including two on

Hello, I have a problem with loader. I recently upgraded from 6_rel to 7_rel. Now when I install world there is a problem booting. Here is what I do: cd /usr/src make buildworld make buildkernel KERNCONF=BLACK make installkernel KERNCONF=BLACK At this point I can reboot and all is good. After boot I install the new world: cd /usr/src mergemaster -p reboot into single user mode cd /usr/src make

I upgraded my 7.0 system to 7.1-RELEASE with freebsd-update only to find that it no longer boots correctly, instead crashing with a BTX backtrace. If I break to the loader prompt and use 'ls /boot', I also get a backtrace. A new install of 7.1 on this hardware using a separate SCSI card and drive array also leads to a BTX backtrace. I have copied this below as the first (most

I was doing some regression testing in 5.5: Specifically testing booting up a 'virgin' hard disk from a clean install. I was testing what happened if the 300 second timeout happened vs hitting <return> for 'fast+insecure' startup and punching in a bunch of random garbage. I found that for some reason, on a 2.4Ghz Celeron, the 'sysctl -a' and 'date' seeding