On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:13:07AM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > > > Parted converts flags to funky partition type names, i think. Not idea, > > > > but it > > > > works, like said, i think parted is inherently broken on this, but > > > > there is > > > > not much we can do at this time. > > > > > > They might have done this following a comment of mine (my memory id fuzzy > > > on this, not sure they ever asked). Using the partition type (which is > > > just a string) is indeed broken IMO. > > > > Why ? take for example the bootstrap partition, which is Apple_bootstrap on > > mac, and 0x41 on chrp/prep MBRs ? The same goes for LVM or RAID partitions. > > Why? Because we don't know how MockOS will react to a partition _type_ set
I don't know any MockOS, please provide real examples. > to anything but Apple_Bootstrap, Apple_HFS, Apple_UNIX_SVR2 or Apple_Free. > If you're sure (or just reasonably confident) Linux_LVM will be ignored by Just give it a try and enlighten us. > Apple boot and disk mount code, go ahead. I can only test this for a > fairly narrow range of OS X versions, and maybe a resurrected 8.6. Since > there's always the partition name (for Apple_UNIX_SVR2 partitions which > MacOS ignores since prehistoric times), I didn't really want to bother > testing this. Yeah, but imagine that the user wants to use the partition name for something sensible, and all this goes down. Notice that i was approached about RAID on sparc, which is the exact same issue too. > > Furthermore, i believe that the partition type is the right place to store > > this info, confirmed by the fact that on MBR a type is used for both RAID > > and > > LVM. After all, the fact that a partition does RAID or LVM cannot be > > compatible by it being a linux swap partition for example, in the way the > > bootable flag is set for example. > > > > I would suggest we use 'Linux_RAID' and 'Linux_LVM' for those two. > > And libfdisk (for example) used to look at the partition _name_ field in > Mac partition tables for clues where to find swap. What's the problem with > that? well, suppose that a french user wants to name it "echange" instead of swap ? > > > So we should press this point a bit more forcefully :-) > > > > Like said, i will gladly write the (trivial) code, if some consensus is > > reached. > > We seem to have trouble reaching a consensus even here :-) Seriously > though, let's just try with 'Linux_RAID' and 'Linux_LVM' partition _type_ > fields in Mac partition tables, maybe add Linux_Swap later and keep plain > data partitons as before. That should keep the comaptibility code to a > minimum (look for 'swap' in type and name fields) and get the scheme some > limited testing. Ok, but as said, Colin Watson vetoed me on that, and as we already have a parted in experimental, ... > > > If parted currently encodes the LVM flag in the partition type we can > > > still put it into the partition name on top of that, and get the Debian > > > LVM maintainer to accept either flag? > > > > No, i would vote against this. After all, a parted user can change the name > > of > > a partition through the parted and d-i/partman interface. > > A mac-fdisk user can change either at will. Linux always reserves your The future belongs to libparted frontends though. And this is not linux, but the new user-friendly debian-installer partman, so ... > right to shoot yourself into the foot. But for the sake of saving users > from their own stupidity, go ahead with the scheme you suggested. I would have for ages, but Colin Watson vetoed it without larger consensus, and since he is one of the RMs, ... And beside i sort of agree with his arguments about compatibility problems. Friendly, Sven Luther
