/pkgs/repository/joher/phaster/core-1.0b on / type pkg
/dev/hd0t79 on / type qnx4
/boot/fs/qnxbase.qfs on /pkgs/base type qnx4
/dev/hd2t77 on /fs/hd2-qnx4 type qnx4
/fs/hd2-qnx4 seems to work fine though the mount point name is rather
convoluted but this is what Qnx gives me automatically after a reboot.
Now I see that the Qnx installation uses a typ e77 partition and I am simply
curious as to the difference between a 77 and a 79.
The Help docs are not specific about this.
For a Mac and Windoze dude, these hd mount points are realy hard to grasp.
/pkgs/repository/joher/phaster/core-1.0b on / type pkg
/dev/hd0t79 on / type qnx4
/boot/fs/qnxbase.qfs on /pkgs/base type qnx4
/dev/hd2t77 on /fs/hd2-qnx4 type qnx4
/fs/hd2-qnx4 seems to work fine though the mount point name is rather
convoluted but this is what Qnx gives me automatically after a reboot.
Now I see that the Qnx installation uses a typ e77 partition and I am
simply
curious as to the difference between a 77 and a 79.
The Help docs are not specific about this.
For a Mac and Windoze dude, these hd mount points are realy hard to grasp.
Conrad Weyns.
Each OS uses to set it’s own partition type number:
Under QNX the type 77,78,79 will be recognise as QNX Partition
Windows Fat32 partition should have the type: 11 and 12
This type helps find out which filesystem to load/mount (qnx4/dos…)
/pkgs/repository/joher/phaster/core-1.0b on / type pkg
/dev/hd0t79 on / type qnx4
/boot/fs/qnxbase.qfs on /pkgs/base type qnx4
/dev/hd2t77 on /fs/hd2-qnx4 type qnx4
/fs/hd2-qnx4 seems to work fine though the mount point name is rather
convoluted but this is what Qnx gives me automatically after a reboot.
Now I see that the Qnx installation uses a typ e77 partition and I am
simply
curious as to the difference between a 77 and a 79.
The Help docs are not specific about this.
For a Mac and Windoze dude, these hd mount points are realy hard to
grasp.
Conrad Weyns.
Each OS uses to set it’s own partition type number:
Under QNX the type 77,78,79 will be recognise as QNX Partition
Windows Fat32 partition should have the type: 11 and 12
This type helps find out which filesystem to load/mount (qnx4/dos…)
Thanks, but does that mean that when I format a new drive for a QNX 4
partition, I can freely choose between type 77, 78 and 79? Had I chooses 78
or 79, would another filesystem have been utilized?
Note the docs for fdisk allows me to set the type (arg to the add command)
but does not give any indication as to the difference.
I am newbie, the documentation is what I have to go by. It is immensely
helpfull - nothing wrong with that!
/pkgs/repository/joher/phaster/core-1.0b on / type pkg
/dev/hd0t79 on / type qnx4
/boot/fs/qnxbase.qfs on /pkgs/base type qnx4
/dev/hd2t77 on /fs/hd2-qnx4 type qnx4
/fs/hd2-qnx4 seems to work fine though the mount point name is rather
convoluted but this is what Qnx gives me automatically after a reboot.
Now I see that the Qnx installation uses a typ e77 partition and I am
simply
curious as to the difference between a 77 and a 79.
The Help docs are not specific about this.
For a Mac and Windoze dude, these hd mount points are realy hard to
grasp.
Conrad Weyns.
Each OS uses to set it’s own partition type number:
Under QNX the type 77,78,79 will )be recognise as QNX Partition
Windows Fat32 partition should have the type: 11 and 12
This type helps find out which filesystem to load/mount (qnx4/dos…)
Thanks, but does that mean that when I format a new drive for a QNX 4
partition, I can freely choose between type 77, 78 and 79? Had I chooses
78
or 79, would another filesystem have been utilized?
Note the docs for fdisk allows me to set the type (arg to the add command)
but does not give any indication as to the difference.
I am newbie, the documentation is what I have to go by. It is immensely
helpfull - nothing wrong with that!
You are correct, when creating a partition to be initialized with QNX4
filesystem you can freely
choose between those types (i.e.: 77, 78, 79 ).
Current 6.x doesn’t depend on these quirks and
having multiple 77 (or 79) partitions is perfectly valid.
(/dev/hd0t77.1, /dev/hd0t77.2 will be enumurated instead)
But I do recommend differing partition numbers,
as guessing which 77 was which is really unintuitive.
Previous versions of QNX seems to assign symbolic names as
77 QNX
78 QNY
79 QNZ
for 2nd, 3rd partitions.
Needed to differ numbers for multiple partitions?
Current 6.x doesn’t depend on these quirks and
having multiple 77 (or 79) partitions is perfectly valid.
(/dev/hd0t77.1, /dev/hd0t77.2 will be enumurated instead)
But I do recommend differing partition numbers,
as guessing which 77 was which is really unintuitive.
Agree. Right now, I have simply made one partition of the whole 80 Gig. and
hope for the best It seems to work just fine but then I havn’t exactly
got much data on it yet. Sooner or later I am probably going to have to
re-install everything from scratch and go about it in a slightly more
controlled fashion as I am loosing the little overview I had 2 days ago -
and I have only been at it for 4 days…
Anyway, it’s good fun!
conrad.
But I do recommend differing partition numbers,
as guessing which 77 was which is really unintuitive.
Agree. Right now, I have simply made one partition of the whole 80 Gig. and
hope for the best > > It seems to work just fine but then I havn’t exactly
got much data on it yet. Sooner or later I am probably going to have to
re-install everything from scratch and go about it in a slightly more
controlled fashion as I am loosing the little overview I had 2 days ago -
and I have only been at it for 4 days…
Anyway, it’s good fun!
conrad.
It’s nice that you can now use the entire disk as a single partition.
I used to create a single small (1 cylinder) partition (type 78) and
mount it as /boot. It was my boot partition. The whole rest of the
disk was a type 77 and mounted as /. It’s nice that I no longer ned
to do that but . . .
Now I mount a partition (type 79) as /var. Under it I put any kind of
logging files that grow sequentiall over time. While QNX handles
fragmented files better than other OSes, there is still some overhead
to reading through a fragmentation. Worse is that a heavily fragmented
partition forces other large (not necessarily sequentially grown) files
to also become fragmented. This way I kind of move all of the likely
fragmentation to one partition that I don’t care as much about being
fragmented.
But I do recommend differing partition numbers,
as guessing which 77 was which is really unintuitive.
Agree. Right now, I have simply made one partition of the whole 80 Gig.
and
hope for the best > > It seems to work just fine but then I havn’t
exactly
got much data on it yet. Sooner or later I am probably going to have to
re-install everything from scratch and go about it in a slightly more
controlled fashion as I am loosing the little overview I had 2 days
ago -
and I have only been at it for 4 days…
Anyway, it’s good fun!
conrad.
It’s nice that you can now use the entire disk as a single partition.
I used to create a single small (1 cylinder) partition (type 78) and
mount it as /boot. It was my boot partition. The whole rest of the
disk was a type 77 and mounted as /. It’s nice that I no longer ned
to do that but . . .
Now I mount a partition (type 79) as /var. Under it I put any kind of
logging files that grow sequentiall over time. While QNX handles
fragmented files better than other OSes, there is still some overhead
to reading through a fragmentation. Worse is that a heavily fragmented
partition forces other large (not necessarily sequentially grown) files
to also become fragmented. This way I kind of move all of the likely
fragmentation to one partition that I don’t care as much about being
fragmented.
Sounds like good advice. I realize I am going to have to start installing
all sooner or later. The 80 Gig disk is only a “store”. Qnx is running on a
seperate 10 Gig disk. There is also another issue when it comes to running
on this pc box I am using that I only discovered recently which is that only
1 out of the 2 ide controllers is a real fast one. This is a problem when
using the box for multiple os’s. Which one is going to get the fast ide? I
could share a hd between os’s using lilo for example but then I’d have to
re-install the entire Win2000 server which is not an option and besides, qnx
requires me to turn off some bios options anyway so I have to muck about
with the bios before switching all the same. (This is USB related mostly
that I have still not been able to make work in qnx - it works great in both
Win2k and RH Linux). So many variants, I am surprised I get to do some real
work at all Right now I am glad I have qnx up and running so that I can
gain some experience with it over some time. It was realy easy to install!
Other than a general curiosity for qnx that I have had for years, I am not
quite sure yet what role it could play in my current or future work.
Thanks for all the input here!
Cheers,
Conrad Weyns
It seems to work just fine but then I havn’t exactly