Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th Dec 2006 23:02 UTC, submitted by Charles A Landemaine
PC-BSD PC-BSD 1.3 RC1 has been released. From the changelog: "Fixed icon size issues in KMenu; installer now does not display extended partitions; installer now can use empty primary partition space to install; fixed issue with BSDStats not properly reporting usage; fixed problem with 'Start' icon text not being translated properly; fixed issues when using installer to upgrade system from 1.2 to 1.3; closed numerous other issues from BETA2." Get it here.
Thread beginning with comment 190927
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Extended partitions
by rhavenn on Tue 12th Dec 2006 00:42 UTC in reply to "Extended partitions"
rhavenn
Member since:
2006-05-12

Just to clear up confusion. The *BSD's create a partition for themselves that has to be a primary and then create slices inside said partition. So, you're still able to chop up your mount points, etc... inside the partition. All in all, it's a bit "cleaner", but I don't know if actually is technically better or worse then the Linux way of partitioning.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Extended partitions
by twenex on Tue 12th Dec 2006 00:50 in reply to "RE: Extended partitions"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

I wonder why they've never made it possible to put it in an extended partition...having to take up a whole primary partition is a bit limiting, imo.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Extended partitions
by KenJackson on Tue 12th Dec 2006 16:28 in reply to "RE[2]: Extended partitions"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

It's reasonable in my view. All local BSD mount points (/usr, /home, /tmp, /var) go into one slice, so all together they only use up one disk 'partition'.

OTOH, if you want to separate /home, /usr and others on a Linux system you have to use up separate disk partitions. Linux must support extended partitions for practical reasons.

This only limits people who want to multi-boot more than 4 OSes on one disk. Those people will have to either buy another disk or use VMware or similar.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Extended partitions
by Nadow on Tue 12th Dec 2006 07:18 in reply to "RE: Extended partitions"
Nadow Member since:
2006-12-12

No, first of all you create the Slice for FreeBSD (called normally Partition in other systems) And then inside of the Slice you create the "Partitions" you want.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Extended partitions
by netpython on Tue 12th Dec 2006 07:22 in reply to "RE[2]: Extended partitions"
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

No, first of all you create the Slice for FreeBSD (called normally Partition in other systems) And then inside of the Slice you create the "Partitions" you want.

So it's possible to have extended partitions only it's called different?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Extended partitions
by Cloudy on Tue 12th Dec 2006 08:34 in reply to "RE: Extended partitions"
Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

FreeBSD and NetBSD handle PC disk partitioning differently than each other.

NetBSD uses its own disklabel on all architectures that have disklike devices, and only uses the PC FDISK style partition on PCs.

I believe OpenBSD is also different, but I'm not familiar with its disk layout.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Extended partitions
by twenex on Tue 12th Dec 2006 11:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Extended partitions"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

That suggests that on, say, the Amiga, you need a separate disk with a netbsd disklabel to store netbsd - but i believe this is incorrect.

However, I believe this *is* the case on architectures like vax, built for VMS, which has no concept of separate partitions on a disk. Right?

Reply Parent Score: 2