On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 03:36:14PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > Or partition we are mounting without formating if its type doesn't > > correspond to the file system it contains. > > Well, i don't think so, not automatically at least.
(Lib)parted repairs the wrong partition types in all cases. In some cases partman will not write the partition table but if it has to for some reason then the partition type will be changed. > > At the time when some partition is being formatted (or simply sceduled > > for mounting) the partition table may already contain physical volumes > > of activated volume groups. > > So what ? a raid or LVM partition is simply a partition with a given flag. The > fact that you modify the other partition on the partition table should in no > way affect any raid or lvm partitions you have, The kernel will complain that it can not reread the partition table. This complain is not dangerous and partman can probably safely hide it from the user but this already is not nice. Moreover the confirmation dialog contains a list of the changed partition tables. If we decide to write all partition tables to the disk just because they contain some formatted partition this means that they have to be included in this list. In most cases this list will contain all partition tables and because of that it will be less informative. I think I can take the partition type from the structures of parted but I wonder the format of these structures can change in future versions of parted. > and you should also in no way > try to put a partition table on a raid or lvm partition. It is currently > possible in partman, but it is a bug, since the kernel will then not be able > to boot the given system, nor mount them. Yes, of course. Anton Zinoviev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
