On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 10:24:48AM -0700, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> > mac-fdisk is no longer broken, lets not fix it until it is.
>
> I had occassion to experience the broken mac-fdisk not too long
> ago. It wasn't all that catastrophic, was it? I don't need to be
> Einstein to realize that my 9.1gig disk isn't really 456gig. Just
that as i have said, is fixed in mac-fdisk 0.1-6 which is in both
woody and potato-proposed-updates.
> went to /var/log/messages and got the real size and put it in there
> as an argument. Worked fine. I noticed that there was a bug filed
> against it a long time ago so there was no reason to even bring it
> up. That's why they have the capacity argument in there, right?
> ~:^) One of those little things that just isn't annoying enough is
> that it could so easily supply reasonable defaults without you
> having to do the math yourself all the time, especially the
which it does now.
> "beginning block" argument. Most people don't use overlapping
> partitions, except in sparc land, and mac-fdisk probably won't let
> you anyway, so what's the dileo? If it was just a little bit more
> annoying I'd go change it myself. Time for a nap instead, I think.
every fdisk implementation i have seen let you choose the starting
block, it makes sense if you for some reason want to leave a `hole' of
free space on the disk. unlike apple's useless tools mac-fdisk will
allow you to do this without silly placeholder partitions.
just use the shortcuts: print the table, look for the Apple_Free where
you want the next partition to start use its partition number like so:
startblock: 2p
see http://penguinppc.org/usr/ybin/doc/mac-fdisk-basics.shtml
--
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
PGP signature
