On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 11:40:08AM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > In the case of the FAT resizer, it is possible to have both the
> > old and new filesystems being valid simultaneously! (Provided the
> > FATs, etc. don't overlap)
>
> If you update block references then they can't cover bot
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, K.G. wrote:
During the last year I've seen 2 Parti Mag** completly trashing NTFS
file systems on laptops,
PM is widely known to often damage things. Those are known software bugs.
and I've had a power outage
I bet you weren't just resizing your workstation filesys
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:25:22 +0200 (MEST) Szakacsits Szabolcs <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please note, that unless power goes down or the box crashes, flushes don't
> matter for consistency but they matter a lot for how the kernel's I/O
> scheduler can optimize reads and writes.
I 100% agree. Bu
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:27:25 +0200 (MEST) Szakacsits Szabolcs <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, K.G. wrote:
> >
> > I've run a couple of tests, violently unplugging the computer while
> > resizing
> > a HFS, and at least it worked fine for me :)
>
> Did you md5's of all files
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, K.G. wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:27:25 +0200 (MEST) Szakacsits Szabolcs <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Did you md5's of all files before and after?
> Of course.
Great! :-)
> > Of course this is still the > "worked a couple of times for me on my
> hardware" categ
Want to know conclusion how to save over 60% on your piIls?
http://www.fa collect irleader.com - Successfull and Proven perpendicular Way to SAVE YOUR joyful M0NEY.
determinant V
A clemency G
A agreeably L
l marijuana U
octuple l
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, K.G. wrote:
>
> I've run a couple of tests, violently unplugging the computer while resizing
> a HFS, and at least it worked fine for me :)
Did you md5's of all files before and after? Of course this is still the
"worked a couple of times for me on my hardware" category whic
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> > Power outage is not a common case
> It is for a lot of people. (Think about all the Indian and Brazillian
> users...)
I mean power outage during using Parted is not a common case.
Let's say it happens in every millionth case. This would mean that
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 11:22:21 +0200 (MEST)
Szakacsits Szabolcs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, K.G. wrote:
>
> > All Parted operations are theoretically power-loss proof, including resizing
> > supported FS.
>
> I'm interested how. I know it's possible but it's not always ve
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 11:22:21AM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > All Parted operations are theoretically power-loss proof, including
> > resizing supported FS.
>
> I'm interested how. I know it's possible but it's not always very trivial.
I wouldn't say it's 100% power-loss proof. There
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 10:17:29AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Resizing (esp. shrinking) a file system has the same issues.
>
> No, the resizers have been designed to have at worst a very small
> chance of data loss in the case of power failure
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, K.G. wrote:
>
> All Parted operations are theoretically power-loss proof, including
> resizing supported FS.
Oh, I didn't realize that. That is of course a worthy goal, although I
imagine hard to achieve.
> I think introducing non power-loss proof operations could be
> distu
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Francisco Valle Gonzalez wrote:
> I'm developing a gtk encapsulation of parted like qtparted written in C.
As gparted? http://gparted.sourceforge.net/
BTW, just like qtparted, gparted is also more than a front-end for Parted.
They are also front-ends for many additional uti
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, K.G. wrote:
> All Parted operations are theoretically power-loss proof, including resizing
> supported FS.
I'm interested how. I know it's possible but it's not always very trivial.
In the general case ensuring consistency is difficult. Disks and
controllers can lie that d
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 10:17:29AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Resizing (esp. shrinking) a file system has the same issues.
No, the resizers have been designed to have at worst a very small
chance of data loss in the case of power failure.
Why do you think it would be an issue? Most resizi
Hi,
First of all, I must greet you for your work developing parted.
I'm developing a gtk encapsulation of parted like qtparted written in
C. I'm seeking for documentation about parted API functions, the one
included with debian packages is not understandable enough for me and
after seeking a lo
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:25:44AM +1000, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:15:45PM +0300, Ville Herva wrote:
>
> The implementation you suggest is dangerous. If, for example, there
> were a blackout halfway during the process, you would lose your
> data.
Resizing (esp. shrinking
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:57:19 +0300, Ville Herva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:25:44AM +1000, you [Andrew Clausen] wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:15:45PM +0300, Ville Herva wrote:
> > > (parted) move 2 32kB 110GB
> > >
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:25:44AM +1000, you [Andrew Clausen] wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:15:45PM +0300, Ville Herva wrote:
> > (parted) move 2 32kB 110GB
> >
> > Error: Can't move a partition onto itself. Try using resize, perhaps?
19 matches
Mail list logo
