hmm, on Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 06:23:31PM -0800, Marco S Hyman said that > frantisek holop writes: > > so what's up with these dick measurements? > > I think you got that part just right :-) > > Expecthing cyl * head * sec/cyl to come up with the number of actual > sectors on the disk is your problem. Modern disk don't have a fixed > number of sec/track. They use Zone Bit Recording which uses a different > number of sec/track depending upon the location of the track on the > disk.
all i "expect" is consistency and the same kind of numbers accross diff OSes.. how am i (and fdisk) supposed to make partitions on CHS boundaries if instead of 19457/255/63 fdisk sees the disk as 152627/64/32? > The code tries to come up with an approximate CHS for historical > reasons. It would probably be best if it just reported the number > of sectors as that is the only important measure. ok, on the 500G disk the fdisk total no. of sectors did not equal to dmesg total no. of sectors. with this disk, it does. why is that? -f -- doubt is the beginning of wisdom
