I absolutely agree with this patch :)
Thanks,
Guillaume
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 11:33:57 +0200 "Ulf-D. Ehlert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Variable initialized only in DEBUG mode:
>
> --- parted-1.6.25.1/libparted/fs_hfs/hfs.c 2005-11-11 13:34:12.0
> +0100
> +++ parted-1.6.25.1/libpa
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:15:10 -0600 Ryan Charles Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> No, in fact with this patch exactly the same behavior is shown,
> dereferencing NULL in the same library function. I did verify that the
> library and the parted binary were rebuilt from scratch with the updat
Many thanks for your perfect bug report. The following patch
probably fix the problem.
Cheers,
Guillaume Knispel
Index: parted/ui.c
===
--- parted/ui.c (revision 483)
+++ parted/ui.c (working copy)
@@ -559,18 +559,21 @@
* d
tions in disk_*.c, and also PedPartitionFlag enum
in disk.h) to select the partition(s) you want to put
in the MBR. Then you'll just have to modify the function
called by gpt_write that create the protective MBR.
Good luck :)
Guillaume Knispel
> -Original Message-
> From: K.G
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:37:26 +0100 Michael Friis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, I'm having some trouble with a harddrive.
>
> First of it held one huge reiserfs partition with a lot of stuff on
> it, but more importantly all my pictures. I then needed some space to
> install linux on the thing,
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:24:55 -0500 Brian Ristuccia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any way to cause parted to make an entry in the protective MBR
> for a partition which exists entirely below 0x? I'd like to use
> this feature to make the boot partition at the beginning of my large
>
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:55:33 +0100
Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:28:54 +0100
> K.G. <"K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> > (PED_SECTOR_SIZE was and now PED_SECTOR_SIZE_DEFAULT
> > (which
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:27:34 +0100 Håkon Løvdal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/11/05, K.G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is purely cosmetic but i'm feeling that
> > PED_SECTOR_SIZE_DEFAULT is a little too long
> > for something that is just defined
Hi,
I'm wondering whether we could make the new sector_size
and phys_sector_size fields 64 bits integers, so any
arithmetic operation involving one of them would return
a 64 bits value.
(PED_SECTOR_SIZE was and now PED_SECTOR_SIZE_DEFAULT
(which has a too long name ;) is of type long long, and
se
This is purely cosmetic but i'm feeling that
PED_SECTOR_SIZE_DEFAULT is a little too long
for something that is just defined to 512 :)
(and will remain forever)
What do you think of PED_SECTOR_MIN or
PED_SECTOR_SMALL or PED_SECTOR_LEG or
PED_SECTOR_ATOM ? (or just 512...)
Guillaume
__
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 13:58:03 +0100 Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
[Parted 1.6.25.1]
> Released.
>
> Leslie
Maybe we could add, for posterity, that this version is
exactly the same as Parted 1.6.25, but the compatibility
with Parted 1.6.24 is correctly maintained while 1.6.25
wa
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 13:32:54 +0100 Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The free translation project suggest the following:
>
> 1) release a private release tarball
> 2) notify their bot
> 3) wait for PO files to arrive
>
> ATM they just get the official release and PO files are th
Hi David,
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:05:18 +1030 David Purton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've have attempted to resize and hfs+ partition in order to install OSX
> 10.4 alongside and existing 10.3 install.
>
> Sadly I think I have learnt too late how to do ths, but maybe it is
> possible to repai
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:23:24 +0100 Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Do any labels other than msdos have support for extended/logical
> partitions? Rationale: the selection must vanish from labels that do
> not differentiate between primary and extended partitions.
Disk labels th
Hi everybody,
Parted 1.6.25.1 has been tagged. The only difference with
1.6.25 is :
Index: configure.in
===
--- configure.in(.../1.6.25)(revision 461)
+++ configure.in(.../1.6.25.1) (revision 461)
@@ -19,10 +19,1
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 15:30:32 +0100 (MET), Szakacsits Szabolcs <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >
> > > Hopefuly with the big changes that will go in 1.6.26 this
> > > will be the case (or almost the case at the very least ;)
> > > I'll prepare a tag a
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:57:54 +0100, Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:20:55 +0100
> Patrick Leslie Polzer >
> wrote:
>
> > linux.c now reports real sector size and has a stub for setting the
> > physical sector size.
> > Made disk_gpt.c compatible for secto
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:40:05 +0100, Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:06:56 +0100
> K.G. <"K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> > I think you forgot to update both PED_INTERFACE_AGE and
> > PED_BINARY_A
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:19:28 +0100, Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I coded a debugging framework similar to assertions and exceptions.
> Have a look at it in include/parted/debug.h and libparted/debug.c.
>
> Usage:
>
> PED_DEBUG ( int loglevel, char* msg, ... );
In ped_debug
Hi,
I think you forgot to update both PED_INTERFACE_AGE and
PED_BINARY_AGE in configure.in when you released 1.6.25.
As a result the soname was bumped even if no API
(and even no ABI) incompatible changes had been done.
I think that for the next release we should continue
as if this one was clean,
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 21:25:50 +0100 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 10:53:40AM -0800, Jen, Janet (Windows IPF Engineer)
> wrote:
> >
> > Leslie,
> >When will 1.6.25 be released? We are releasing parted with Rogerio's
> > changes next week. Do we need to release
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 20:33:41 +0100 Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I think we should merge people/xilun/* to a development branch.
> Can anyone do it please?
I'm not sure we should :)
I've not finished sciUnits yet, atari is not enough tested
and i'm not sure i want to maintain
lioth of the debian
> project and can be accessed from the project page which is
> http://alioth.debian.org/projects/parted/.
I'm not sure this is on alioth but it can be web browsed at
http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/parted/
Cheers,
Guillaume Knispel
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 16:20:16 +0100 "
Hi Mathieu,
Parted 1.6.25 has been released.
Could you please update the web page?
Thanks,
Guillaume Knispel
___
Bug-parted mailing list
Bug-parted@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-parted
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 12:01:33 +0100 Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> http://parted.alioth.debian.org/guidelines/
>* include changes to the files /AUTHORS and /ChangeLog.
> Please note that the latter has a special formatting that must be
> applied to the entries.
Right.
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 08:12:45 -0800
From: "Amir Habibi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'K.G.'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: GPT / LILO
Hi Guillaume
Thank you for replying to my mail.
Actually I added a new partition at
Hi,
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:52:44 -0800 "Amir Habibi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm using parted to create and maintain a GPT partition on a raid unit.
> Initially everything is fine when I use parted to create partition and then
> run lilo to install boot loader.
>
> However after a while when
On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 15:32:08 -0200 Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > * code analysis tools: what do you think about setting up LXR and
> > > nightly-updated Doxygen docs on our Berlios space? Too muc
Hi,
Only my opinion:
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 15:18:53 -0600 "Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed a few things in parted's source code that might warrant
> fixing, particularly for the GUID Partition Table (GPT) partition format
> used by Extensible Firmware Interf
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 16:28:04 +0100 Patrick Leslie Polzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * code analysis tools: what do you think about setting up LXR and
> nightly-updated Doxygen docs on our Berlios space? Too much overhead?
> Good idea?
For me it's a good idea. I would also like a wiki or someth
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 16:11:40 +0300 Nishant Tharani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a bug:
> A bug has been detected in GNU parted. Please email a bug report to
> bug-parted@gnu.org containing the version (1.6.21) and the following
> message:
>
> Assertion ((C * heads + H) * sectors + S == A) at
> ..
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:01:31 -0400 (EDT) Chris Lumens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got a bug report where the reporter has a disk with a sector size
> other than 512 bytes and believes the message displayed is confusing.
> In particular, the "Ignore" option does ignore the message by continuin
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:57:48 +0100 Nick Whitehurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ubuntu Breezy 5.10
> using: GParted
> Operation: resize a partition to make way for adding a third partion on
> the drive. The operation failed an left the partion table partly
> corrupted. GParted then displayed the
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:50:54 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 09:00:56PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:55:41 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > >
e version (1.6.21) and the
> following message:Assertion (disk != NULL) at ../../libparted/disk.c:1037
> in function ped_disk_next_partition() failed.
>
> It says that the libparted version and file and line number.
Thanks
> K.G. wrote:
>
> > >My wish is that "qtparte
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:55:41 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 04:54:03PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:30:21 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 04:21:05PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:58:41 -0400 Yasunari Tosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> qtparted 0.4.4 (Knoppix 4.0.2 CD boot) will crash on a SATA striped disk.
>
Can you tell us the version of libparted (or of the parted command line util
because it's the same version).
> We have Shuttle XPC
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:30:21 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 04:21:05PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > Hi and thanks for your bug report,
> >
> > On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:01:05 +0800 Nick Bower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 07:52:27 -0500 "Harley D. Eades" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm having problems checking out:
>
> > % svn co --username dejari-guest svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/parted
> > Password:
> > Password:
> > Password:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s password:
> > Permission denied,
Hi and thanks for your bug report,
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:01:05 +0800 Nick Bower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks. Unfortunately this is not so easy however - G5's don't have a
> floppy drive (great huh). Although I'll give it a shot trying to create
> a boot cd or something.
I think there
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:01:00 +0200 "Leslie P. Polzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm having problems checking out:
>
> % svn co --username dejari-guest svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/parted
> Password:
> Password:
> Password:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s password:
> Permission denied, pl
Hi Leslie,
Some important fixes have been done since 1.6.24 and Sven, I
and others are thinking that a new release is needed.
However Sven doesn't have enough time and doesn't remember
how to do it.
Could you please take care of that ?
Thanks,
Guillaume Knispel
_
Hi list,
Anyone knows what _check_dodgy_pointer is for in libparted.c ?
I can't see any assignment to dodgy_malloc_list...
Thanks,
Guillaume Knispel
___
Bug-parted mailing list
Bug-parted@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-parted
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 21:36:20 +0200 "santi.mazzaglia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Assertion ((C * heads + H) * sectors + S == A)
> at ../../libparted/disk_dos.c:578 in function
> probe_partition_for_geom() failed.
>
> after I wrote
> $ sudo parted /dev/sda
> (/dev/sda being a 256 MB pen-drive)
>
Hi Mathieu,
Could you please update the GNU Parted web site.
>From most to least important IMO:
* The last parted package is 1.6.24, SVN is now
available and for now you can remove informations
about the devel branch.
* Also in Reporting bugs it would be good to ask
people to report "fdisk -l /dev
On Sat, 08 Oct 2005 17:05:22 -0400 Michael Flaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ah, OK, I didn't know 1.6.24 existed... Yup, I just tried it, it
> worked. Thanks!
Yes, the website needs to be updated (but i don't even know who does
that :P )
> As far as the 2nd report I mailed, with the "stra
On Sat, 08 Oct 2005 22:23:58 +0200 Dejan Hrubenja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ein Bug in GNU parted wurde entdeckt. Bitte senden Sie einen Bugreport
> an bug-parted@gnu.org unter Angabe der Version (1.6.20) und der
> folgenden Meldung:Assertion ((C * heads + H) * sectors + S == A) at
> ../../libp
On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 23:32:55 -0400 Michael Flaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Assertion (head_size <= 63) at disk_dos.c:584 in function
> > probe_partition_for_geom() failed.
Hi,
Thanks for your very detailled bug report.
This is very probably already corrected in 1.6.24.
Cheers,
Guillaume
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 17:37:23 + Mihai Radu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/mnt/hda9# qtparted
> Error: Unable to satisfy all constraints on the partition.
> A bug has been detected in GNU parted. Please email a bug report to
> bug-parted@gnu.org containing the version (1.6.22) a
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 14:16:47 -0400 Gary Greene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm hard at work creating an installer for the PhoeNUX OS distribution and am
> using GNU PartEd to create the partitions for the install, however I've found
> that I need an explaination of the help documentation concern
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:18:50 +0100 Chris Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# parted /dev/sdb
> GNU Parted 1.6.15
> Copyright (C) 1998 - 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This program is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License.
>
> This program is distribu
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 07:52:49 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 10:57:53PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 13:10:06 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 12:21:51AM +0200, K.G. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 09:17:34 -0300 Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > If you looked the SVN yesterday, you've probably seen that the upstream/tags
> > subdirectory
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 13:10:06 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 12:21:51AM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:29:09 +0200 Iván Blanco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > >
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:29:09 +0200 Iván Blanco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When I run qtparted the console show me this message):
> A bug has been detected in GNU parted. Please email a bug report to
> bug-parted@gnu.org containing the version (1.6.24) and the following
> message:Ass
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 13:05:23 +0200 Sebastian Seifert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> parted asked me to report an assertion failure, which happenened while
> trying to resize a 160GB FAT32 partition on a 160Gb external USB drive
> to 110GB.
>
> My partition table:
>
> eden:/mnt# fdisk -l
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:47:01 -0700 (PDT) Joerg Balsiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Assertion ((c * heads + h) * sectors + s == a) at disk_dos.c:603 in function
> probe_partition_for_geom() failed
>
>
> The above message appeared after trying to remove a reiser4 partition.
Hi,
This should be
Hi everybody,
If you looked the SVN yesterday, you've probably seen that the upstream/tags
subdirectory content wasn't particularly coherent, so I reorganized it and
now each parted version is under upstream/tags/parted-1-6-Z instead of
upstream/tags/{rel,parted}-1-6-Z/stable .
Guillaume Knispel
On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:35:37 -0300 Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Indeed there's absolutly nothing but useless forking changelog informations
> > in devel, that is not already in stable... There
On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:22:42 -0300 Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Håkon Løvdal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On 9/9/05, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I hear the devel tree is dead, so mayeb it can fall apart.
> >
> > I second that. I recently checked out both stabl
I always forget to attach things :)
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:07:07 +0200 "K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I've commited the attached patch, which (should) get ride of the infamous
> " Assertion (metadata_length > 0) at disk_dos.c in func
Hi list,
I've commited the attached patch, which (should) get ride of the infamous
" Assertion (metadata_length > 0) at disk_dos.c in function
add_logical_part_metadata() failed " bug (at least for partitions schemes
generated by Parted...).
While I was writing it I discovered that the previous c
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:00:56 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 03:01:15PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I've 2 questions:
> > * There used to be a CVS Web on Alioth. Does it disappear?
>
> Not s
Hi list,
I've 2 questions:
* There used to be a CVS Web on Alioth. Does it disappear?
* When will SVN be available ?
Thanks,
Guillaume Knispel
___
Bug-parted mailing list
Bug-parted@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-par
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 09:06:20 +0200 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Was checking out qtparted; had it view the usb drive on which I keep my
> Knoppix config, and the console showed this:
>
> "A bug has been detected in GNU parted. Please email a bug report to
> bug-parted@gnu.org containing the ve
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 19:58:19 +0200 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Nicholas,
>
> I think bug-parted@gnu.org is better suited for this kind of question, and
> K.G. is the hfs resizing expert there, so i leave you in his expert hands.
>
> On Wed, Aug 17,
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:39:44 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 07:55:57AM +1000, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 11:09:06PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> >
> > > Same remark for ((DosPartitionData)(part->disk_specific))->orig
&g
Hi,
I've committed the attached patch and discovered that
range_start and range_end in parted.c probably need to
be freed too :
==7233== 56 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 7 of 17
==7233==at 0x1B90459D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:130)
==7233==by 0x8055E3C: ped_malloc
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 22:34:31 +0200 "K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Shouldn't trav_info->dir_name be freed in fat_traverse_complete ?
> (I cheated, Valgrind told me :)
Same remark for ((DosPartitionData)(part->disk_specific))->orig
in msdos_pa
Hi,
Shouldn't trav_info->dir_name be freed in fat_traverse_complete ?
(I cheated, Valgrind told me :)
Cheers,
Guillaume Knispel
___
Bug-parted mailing list
Bug-parted@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-parted
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 23:17:46 +0200 Vlado Potisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Can you try to backtrace it now ?
>
> Here you are:
>
> #0 exception_handler (ex=0x87ea258) at ui.c:269
[...]
> #5 0x00f98aa1 in ped_geometry_new (dev=0x87e99d8, start=612073315594312280,
> length=270725450984) at
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 16:14:07 +0200
Vlado Potisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Here is a patch
> > Vlado you can test it, and if everybody think it is good i'll apply it
> > to CVS.
>
> Thank you for the patch, it looks good. No error messages and the computation
> results for the partition #5 (w
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 18:41:17 +1000 Andrew Clausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 10:25:55AM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > This is exactly the problem i guessed in my previous mail.
> > There is an off by one error due to FP arith.
> >
> > The eq
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 14:05:01 +0200 "K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 18:41:17 +1000 Andrew Clausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 10:25:55AM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > > This is exactly the problem i guessed in
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 18:41:17 +1000
Andrew Clausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 10:25:55AM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > This is exactly the problem i guessed in my previous mail.
> > There is an off by one error due to FP arith.
> >
> > The eq
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 09:24:33 +0200 Vlado Potisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Again, I can't reproduce the problem from the numbers below. I get
> > head_size = 63. (I was typing in the formulas into python...)
> >
> > Perhaps the problem is that "float" doesn't have enough precision.
> > So, the
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 09:37:43 +1000 Andrew Clausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Again, I can't reproduce the problem from the numbers below. I get
> head_size = 63. (I was typing in the formulas into python...)
>
> Perhaps the problem is that "float" doesn't have enough precision.
> So, the firs
Hi lists,
I haven't found what is to be done after updating po/POTFILES.in
Does anybody know ?
Cheers,
Guillaume Knispel
___
Bug-parted mailing list
Bug-parted@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-parted
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:25:26 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 11:41:44AM -0700, Jen, Janet (Windows IPF Engineer)
> wrote:
> > Dear reviewers,
> >Have the changes in parted passed your review?
> Sorry, I totally forgot your issue.
>
> Please remove the copyright notice
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
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
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
> > >
Hi,
The FSF address in Parted files was a mix of "675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA
02139, USA"
and "59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA" with various typo
details
everywhere.
The CVS now contains only :
"51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA"
with still some lin
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:06:14 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 06:20:40PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > "51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA"
> >
> > Shouldn't we change every old addresses with the new one ?
> Y
Hi,
The FSF address in Parted files is a mix of "675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139,
USA"
and "59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA" with various typo
details
everywhere, whereas the current valid address is
"51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA"
Shouldn't
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 14:31:34 +0200
"K.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't access the CVS anymore either... have
> we already swapped to svn ?
The CVS is back, forget about that...
Guillaume
___
Bug-parted mailing l
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 12:30:11 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello list,
>
> I wonder what I should work on next - perhaps you can help me.
> The following things need to be done:
>
> 1) CVS clean-up (remove configure, libtool, etc.)
I don't see any configure in the CVS ?
I can't access the
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:01:31 -0400 (EDT)
Chris Lumens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately, I can't test this since I have no disks with weird sector
> sizes. It compiles, though. If this looks like a good fix to everyone
> on this list, I can talk to the bug reporter to see about him test
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:56:04 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Andrew, Sven and me discussed this matter earlier and decided
> we should try Berlios so we can put things together
> (Savannah/FTP, Alioth/CVS, GNU/(WWW,ML)).
> Any objections? If not I'm going to register an account for
> Parted there
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:43:51 -0400
"Leven, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a Red Hat enterprise 3 server with the following:
>
> The extra space available has not been added to /dev/sda4 yet. When I
> attempted it it came back and said that the file systems was active
> (ignore/cancel
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 20:47:29 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> please give me your Berlios IDs so I can add you to the project.
Mine is xilun
Cheers,
Guillaume Knispel
___
Bug-parted mailing list
Bug-parted@gnu.org
http://lists.gn
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 09:10:06 +0200
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 02:31:04AM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:19:48 +0200
> > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 06:56:44
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:19:48 +0200
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 06:56:44PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > The devel branch is now totally out of sync with the recent progress
> > made in stable, and just co
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:32:18 -0400 (EDT)
David Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just wanted to ask if parted would have checked or complained
> if the fs block to be moved didn't actually fit in the reduced
> size.
> The fact that is it 100% full makes me nervous, but perhaps I
> just got lucky
Hi everybody,
The doc available online at http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/
is realy out of date now: it's the doc of GNU Parted, version 1.6.1,
13 May 2002...
In a totally different register, i've commited patchs for hfsx support
and hfs+ / hfsx journaling support, and updated parted.te
Hi everybody,
The devel branch is now totally out of sync with the recent progress
made in stable, and just correspond to an old stable version.
Maybe we could just drop it and use a real CVS branch instead ?
That would allow us to apply patches from stable to devel, and in the
meantime to start
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 22:12:50 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 10:02:56PM +0200, K.G. wrote:
> >
> > I don't like the idea very much...
> > Some people need to do regression tests remotely, which is quite a pain
> > if you need X, and anyway
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:22:45 +1000
Andrew Clausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 02:39:43AM +0300, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > >Why? Only developers wanting to run tests would need the external
> > >package.
> >
> > As many people should be able to do it without any hass
99 matches
Mail list logo
