[Thus spake Greg A. Woods ("GAW: ") 7:12pm...]

GAW: > Please don't belittle mine by claiming yours makes more sense.
GAW:
GAW: Well, you were complaining that the basic system installation tool
GAW: didn't allow you to do something that almost everyone else believes to
GAW: be both dangerous and unnecessary and which has as a result caused
GAW: protective measures to be put in place to prevent that "dangerous" mode
GAW: of use.

"Make it an option."  I reserve the right to tell the system that "I
know what the hell I'm doing".

GAW: I'm just pointing out that you already ahve a plethora of tools at your
GAW: disposal which will help you to achieve the very same goals, but without
GAW: bumping up against any of the protective measures the system puts in
GAW: place that are preventing you from doing things the old way you were
GAW: accustomed to doing them; and perhaps even with greater accuracy and
GAW: integrity.

There is that; just as long as disklabel itself doesn't start to
fatally kvetch about it.

GAW: > but sometimes I work a bit differently, and somewhat "outside the
GAW: > box",
GAW:
GAW: Well you're definitely not thinking outside the box on this one!  ;-)

Beg pardon?

GAW: > especially when the "box" is built after the situation arises.
GAW:
GAW: Well if the box is already built

I think you and I do not share the same current definition of "box".


GAW: then that begs the question of how a
GAW: tool designed and used primarily for the building of new boxes could
GAW: possibly be preventing you from maintaining your old existing boxes with
GAW: their existing disklabels.

Well, apparently, it does, from what der Mouse has reported.

GAW: I think someone did ask the question of whether or not you were having
GAW: problems with the "upgrade" option nor not, and I agree that the upgrade
GAW: option should not stop working just because an existing partition table
GAW: isn't as carefully constructed as the new software would have made it.

I'm making observations and concurring with der Mouse's evaluations.

Personally, I do NOT use the installer because I find it much less of
a pain to do everything by hand, since at least there I know what I'm
doing.

And your point is taken:  At least, thus far, disklabel is not trying
to be ubersmart and restrictive.  It complains, and I can live with that.

[*cough* FDISK *cough*, on the other hand, annoys me in that I cannot have
a MSDOS partition *inside* a NetBSD partition.  At least not one recognisable
by MS.]

GAW: My limited experience with the "use existing" and "upgrade" options in
GAW: sysinst to date suggest that it won't fail (if you don't need to
GAW: repartition the disk then you don't need to run the new restrictive

See above about making it optional.

Or is it assumed that "True Experts" don't need to run the installer?
(Heck, I forget MAKEDEV sometimes on a by-hand install.  Anything you
can forget, I have, at one point or other.)

GAW: version of disklabel from sysinst), though at the moment my own build of
GAW: systinst isn't able to even find and mount filesystems for an upgrade
GAW: for some reason....  (It seems a string I thought was NUL terminated is
GAW: not, or something like that.)

Now, THAT'S just plain gross and should be dealt with post-haste...

				--*greywolf;
--
Been there.  Done that.  Bought the T-shirt.  Destroyed the planet.  Left.