Editing Slices Question

[kmoore134]

Ok folks, here's a tricky problem i'm running into. I'm seeing / hearing a fair amount about how FreeBSD's slices don't happily co-exist with Linux's / Windows when adding / removing custom partitions. From my understanding its because of the way FBSD see's slices, and only can work with the 4 primaries. This can cause problems where users try to add / remove a slice, and end up ruining their other partitions. This is in my opinion, unacceptable. I haven't found a way to prevent it just yet, and if you have i'm all ears.

So here's the options:


1. I can remove the add / remove slice buttons, which means a user has to select a drive / primary partition to perform the install. This is limiting, but it works, and I dont have to worry about destroying people's partitions. NOTE: This has nothing to do with the custom disklabel for mount-points, like /tmp /usr, etc.

2. I can leave them in, and provide some very in-your-face warnings, but the risk still exists.

Anybody else have some ideas or options on how to solve this? Modifying the FreeBSD code to make it support extended partitions isn't an option at this time, because I don't want to break compat. This is something i'm interested in fixing for 0.8, so please feel free to speak up :)

[lazyilmaz]

I would say keep it safe till you have found something for this problem.

[popey]

I've only had problems with the PCBSD installer, none with Freebsd. So how about an option to create/modify slices using sysinstall/fdisk ?

[pcbsdusr]

If it's not safe and no way to fix this has been found so far i'd remove it temporarily until we get the manpower to quickly adress that issue.

More important issues have to be solved and that is not a critical feature so i'd leave it alone for a while.

I say remove it (unless someone here finds a way to fix it) or else we will only get people into trouble.


RF

[kmoore134]

Here's a possible compromise solutions for the meantime. I can remove that feature, but then in the text menu that comes up before the graphical install, I can make a link to the "fdisk" editor from /stand/sysinstall. So power-users can manually tweak / setup partitions, and then launch the GUI when they are ready to begin the actual install. But normal users can just run the GUI and select entire disk, or choose a partition to install on. Whats everyone think?

[popey]

Gets my vote :D

[sblevin]

Here's a possible compromise solutions for the meantime. I can remove that feature, but then in the text menu that comes up before the graphical install, I can make a link to the "fdisk" editor from /stand/sysinstall. So power-users can manually tweak / setup partitions, and then launch the GUI when they are ready to begin the actual install. But normal users can just run the GUI and select entire disk, or choose a partition to install on. Whats everyone think?

I think the only damage to PC-BSD's reputation thus far could come from the partitioning hastles some people are having. I KNOW that mucking about with partitions just IS dangerous, but no amount of warnings will deter many (most?) users from actually trying.

Kris - I love the idea of offering an expert mode, for now at least FDISK will have to be it.

But what about .........

EDITED IN: SCRAP EVERYTHING BELOW THIS - Qtparted isn't interested in FreeBSD partition slicing it appears.

Thank GOODNESS QtParted is back in the world of the living. The author dropped it, but the torch has been picked up and it's off and running again.

Check this -> http://qtparted.sourceforge.net/screenshots.en.html

You can resize partitions, create, edit, whatever. I've seen it start up on boot disks with very little dependency work, so maybe it could be the "default" resize/create tool (still in expert mode)

There is the text based one as well, but I've never used it.

http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/

FDISK is a horror story in my mind - perhaps it's still an option for experts, in every sense of the word.

EDITED IN:

I forgot to say - I have used a linux boot CD with QT parted to resize, then add another NTFS partion on XP Pro, so I could have a perfectly clean environment for my music software studio environment.

I tested it out in VMware first and it was happy to resize and create NTFS partitions.

I'll try getting a version happening for PC-BSD and ufs and report back - but the team itself might be interested in it if we are.

[antik]

Here's a possible compromise solutions for the meantime. I can remove that feature, but then in the text menu that comes up before the graphical install, I can make a link to the "fdisk" editor from /stand/sysinstall. So power-users can manually tweak / setup partitions, and then launch the GUI when they are ready to begin the actual install. But normal users can just run the GUI and select entire disk, or choose a partition to install on. Whats everyone think?


I recommend default partition layout:
/ 2GB
/boot/ 100MB
swap 2xRAM
/usr/ all available

[berVi]

I recommend default partition layout:
/ 2GB
/boot/ 100MB
swap 2xRAM
/usr/ all available

i think less swap will be enough.

[berVi]

i vote on the 'other' option and this would be the that. :arrow:

Here's a possible compromise solutions for the meantime. I can remove that feature, but then in the text menu that comes up before the graphical install, I can make a link to the "fdisk" editor from /stand/sysinstall. So power-users can manually tweak / setup partitions, and then launch the GUI when they are ready to begin the actual install. But normal users can just run the GUI and select entire disk, or choose a partition to install on. Whats everyone think?

[antik]

I recommend default partition layout:
/ 2GB
/boot/ 100MB
swap 2xRAM
/usr/ all available

i think less swap will be enough.

Other's have pointed out that you don't _need_ swap space. If you have
enough RAM, you can operate without it.

However, if you need to do kernel core dumps (in the even you run into kernel
panic problems) you will need at least as much swap space as you have RAM,
plus a little.

Additionally, if your machine ever does start to swap, FreeBSD's VM code
_is_ optimized on the assumption that you have 2x your RAM in swap. If
the machine starts to swap, you will get the best performance under all
loads (including _heavy_ swapping) if you have 2x RAM in swap.

However, FreeBSD still performs nicely with less swap than that.

[berVi]

Other's have pointed out that you don't _need_ swap space. If you have
enough RAM, you can operate without it.

However, if you need to do kernel core dumps (in the even you run into kernel
panic problems) you will need at least as much swap space as you have RAM,
plus a little.

Additionally, if your machine ever does start to swap, FreeBSD's VM code
_is_ optimized on the assumption that you have 2x your RAM in swap. If
the machine starts to swap, you will get the best performance under all
loads (including _heavy_ swapping) if you have 2x RAM in swap.

However, FreeBSD still performs nicely with less swap than that.
thanks for the info, then 2x would be nice :wink: :D

[kmoore134]

Ok, here's what i'm going to do. I've made the "fdisk" option on the text menu, so that users can do any special HD config they need before they start the graphical install. I'll also see about changing the default disklabel layout to something more FreeBSD standard :) As usual, you can customize it from the GUI as well.

[Disruptive_Nature]

I recommend default partition layout:
/ 2GB
/boot/ 100MB
swap 2xRAM
/usr/ all available

I think 2xRAM is good, but i did 3xRAM cuz I have only 96mb, so maybe an option for people who have less than 128mb (3xram) and for those who have above (2xram). I think that it'll be good, cuz when I had less swap, I had some problems, but that was maybe because of my hardware form garbage :P

[Weixiong]

I run one machine with PC-BSD only, dualboot XP/PC-BSD on another, and didn't encounter any disk problems so I really don't have an opinion.

I was just wondering how I ended up with 999MB of swap space., not that I'm complaining. I've got 256 RAM.

http://www.geocities.com/mindfiles/e4u.jpg