On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 11:20:26PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 03:25:00PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > > On Monday 28 July 2008, Felix Zielcke wrote: > > > Am Montag, den 28.07.2008, 14:41 -0400 schrieb Chris Knadle: > > > > However on the last test I did make an error and left out the -d > > > > option to grub-probe, and that's required for the grub-probe to succeed, > > > > so unfortunately the output I posted is erroneous. > > > > A new one is attached which has Robert's patch applied -- it does > > > > succeed in finding the partition, but unfortunately we can't fix the > > > > problem this way because I believe it makes Apple partition detection > > > > *always* fail. > > > > > > Urgs, yeah didn't see that. > > > You have to use -d if you give a device. > > > Why do you think that with this it will always fail? > > > > Because the test that the patch does is to check for an HFS+ filesystem > > magic number against the first 2 bytes on the drive, which contains a jump > > vector for the Grub stage1 binary. i.e. in order for the test to pass, > > Grub > > has to be unbootable. > > My check has nothing to do with HFS+, it's based on the header magic number > (0x4552), which differs from the partition magic (0x504D) but also from the > HFS+ magic (0x482B, 0x4858). > > Please could you test it against an apple partmap?
Actually, it was simple for me to test, since Parted supports apple/mac partition tables. The test I added succeeds with the partition I created, so it must be good. I just checked that in. Thanks a lot for the long & tedious debugging process. -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
