Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> > One weird thing. It told me the minimum size was 3.2 gb, but if I typed
> > in exactly that, it said "too small size". I changed it to 3.3 and it
> > was ok. Rounding error? The actual minimum, according to ntfsresize, is
> > 3231584256 bytes.
>
> 3.2G = 32 bytes
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 04:41:19PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
>
> Still?
>
> busybox-cvs (20040623-1) unstable; urgency=low
>
> * New CVS version.
> - Support 64 bit arithmetic. (closes: #251302)
>
> -- Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wed, 23 Jun 2004 21:53:52 +0200
Wow! :-)
Anton Z
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 06:26:14PM +0300, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 06:07:30PM +0300, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> > 3.2G = 32 bytes and is less than 3232584256 bytes
>
> Partman rounds long numbers by truncating them because the busybox
> arithmetic is limited (on i386) t
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 06:07:30PM +0300, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
>
> 3.2G = 32 bytes and is less than 3232584256 bytes
Partman rounds long numbers by truncating them because the busybox
arithmetic is limited (on i386) to 32 bits so partman needs to use
string operations for its arithmetic.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 01:40:28PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> Well it was grepping for "may resize" but the string is "might resize"[1].
> Fixed that, but the code to get the size also depended on the existence
> of $backupdev/$oldid, and backupdev was
> /var/lib/partman/backup/devices/=... -- th
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Joey Hess wrote:
> Of course since your current interface encourages grepping ntfsresize's
> output, it's unlikely that the user will see it at all. Especially if
> there's a GUI involved.
GUI's started to grep for things then I added the WARNING's to the code.
So, what woul
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> Partman looks at the part of the ntfsresize output that gives a value in
> bytes. That value was, like I said, output as exactly 3231584256 bytes,
> correctly as far as I can tell. No matter what you call a k M or G, a
> byte is a byte.
If I understand y
Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> If I understand you right, you want to say that partman rounded down the
> value, so there is bug in partman. This is what you wrote:
>
> "It told me the minimum size was 3.2 gb"
>
> but you didn't explain who is "it". Partman or ntfsresize? Ntfsresize
> tells t
Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> man ntfsresize:
>
>ntfsresize conforms to the SI, ATA, IEEE standards and
>the disk manufacturers by using k=10^3, M=10^6 and G=10^9.
>
> fdisk, cfdisk, reiser_reiserfs use the same decimal units and parted was
> supposed to be converted too 2 years a
Joey Hess wrote,
> One weird thing. It told me the minimum size was 3.2 gb, but if I typed
> in exactly that, it said "too small size". I changed it to 3.3 and it
> was ok. Rounding error? The actual minimum, according to ntfsresize, is
> 3231584256 bytes.
man ntfsresize:
ntfsresize con
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Anton,
Just for comparison, here's what I get if I run that command on my laptop.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo ntfsresize -f -i /dev/hda1
ntfsresize v1.9.0
NTFS volume version: 3.1
Cluster size : 4096 bytes
Current volume size: 10001904128 b
Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> Yes. There is a code that tries to parse the output of
>
> ntfsresize -f -i DEVICE_NAME
>
> but it didn't work and partman falls back on some very minimal size. If
> you still have this Win partition can you send me the output of this
> command. I want to be sure that
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 11:05:31PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> I guess the minimum size is not properly detected, and no error is
> shown on failure.
Yes. There is a code that tries to parse the output of
ntfsresize -f -i DEVICE_NAME
but it didn't work and partman falls back on some very minima
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 08:22:13PM +0300, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> Yesterday I made some changes in partman and partman-partitioning to
> allow resizing of NTFS partitions.
>
This is nothing short of bloody brilliant. Good stuff. This will make it
approach something close to as easy as falling off
Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> One question is who will care to install ntfstools-udeb. I see three
> choices:
>
> 1. ntfstools-udeb receives standard priority
> 2. partman-partitioning depends on ntfstools-udeb
> 3. left things as they are now - the user will have to request the
>installation of nt
I installed windows 2003 server[1] and it made a 40 gb ntfs partition. If I
select the partiton and resize, it says the minimum size is 512 bytes. I
told it to resize it down to 1 gb, and it went back to the main menu
with no error message (or size change). I guess the minimum size is not
properly
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 30 September 2004 01:22
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: NTFS resize in partman
>
>
> At 29 Sep 04 19:51:20 GMT,
> Joey Hess wrote:
> > Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> > > Yesterday I made some changes in partman and partman-pa
At 29 Sep 04 19:51:20 GMT,
Joey Hess wrote:
> Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> > Yesterday I made some changes in partman and partman-partitioning to
> > allow resizing of NTFS partitions.
> >
> > There is no progress bar and in the file
> > partman-partitioning/active_partition/resize/choices we have to
>
|| On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 20:22:13 +0300
|| Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
az> Yesterday I made some changes in partman and partman-partitioning to
az> allow resizing of NTFS partitions.
Really Good :-)
az> One question is who will care to install ntfstools-udeb. I see three
az> choice
Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> Yesterday I made some changes in partman and partman-partitioning to
> allow resizing of NTFS partitions.
>
> There is no progress bar and in the file
> partman-partitioning/active_partition/resize/choices we have to
> replace "/usr/sbin/ntfsresize" by "/usr/bin/ntfsresize"
* Szakacsits Szabolcs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040123 12:49]:
> > This is one of my favourite stories!
>
> Talking about favourites, here is my "favourite" challange. Since earlier
> ntfsresize could resize only if there weren't data after the new size,
> many people made the compromise "ok, let's shr
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> This is one of my favourite stories!
Talking about favourites, here is my "favourite" challange. Since earlier
ntfsresize could resize only if there weren't data after the new size,
many people made the compromise "ok, let's shrink here now and more l
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:12:55PM +1100, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> > [ parted in ocaml ]
> > > > I'm afraid it wouldn't be :)
> > > I would like it, if that counts!
> >
> > :))
>
> One thing with O'Caml: would it make it difficult to interface
> libocamlparted with distro installers? I have
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 02:19:02AM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > This patch only solves half the problem. I guess it's the important
> > half though. (The other half is getting Parted to talk to you in
> > custom units)
>
> Couldn't that part be used/applied until the left is done? I mea
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 02:19:02AM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > > - most distros ship parted but I don't know any who ships ocaml
> > Debian :)
>
> Well, in that case Mandrake also :)
All major distros do, i think. After all it is used in software as
mldonkey, coq, and apparently also
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 11:06:00AM +1100, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 08:16:32PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > > This is a real problem, but again not one of libparted per see, more one
> > > linked to the fact that there is no open CVS or whatever repository.
> > > This
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 04:18:10PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > - one of the most disliked one described below, even a patch is provided
> > to solve it (at least partly),
> >
> > http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-parted/2003-05/m
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 08:16:32PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > This is a real problem, but again not one of libparted per see, more one
> > linked to the fact that there is no open CVS or whatever repository.
> > This has to be solved soon, or parted will be forked or something.
>
> E.g.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 04:18:10PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> - one of the most disliked one described below, even a patch is provided
> to solve it (at least partly),
>
> http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-parted/2003-05/msg00046.html
>
> Knowing where things are in se
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 08:16:32PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I know nothing about ntfs, but i suppose it is somewhat silly to have to
> > mount the partition while resizing it.
>
> It's called online resizing. XFS, JFS, reiserfs support onli
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
> I know nothing about ntfs, but i suppose it is somewhat silly to have to
> mount the partition while resizing it.
It's called online resizing. XFS, JFS, reiserfs support online expansion.
However NTFS resizing is offline and it's indeed unwise to have th
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 04:18:10PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 10:43:33PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > > It isn't only about just moving the code to libntfs (I answered this some
> > > month ago on bug-parted) b
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 10:43:33PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > It isn't only about just moving the code to libntfs (I answered this some
> > month ago on bug-parted) but
>
> Yep, but it is the necessary step to have do the libparted side of
> th
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 10:43:33PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 16:14, Sven Luther wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, first, i have no intention to do so myself too, but it would be
> > > nice if you could give us an estimatio
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> BTW, it would be really excellent to get this merged into libparted.
> (I understand this might be low or no priority for you at all, but
> many people would benefit from it.)
I don't doubt. But the need for full relocation support is _MUCH_ higher.
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 16:14, Sven Luther wrote:
> >
> > Well, first, i have no intention to do so myself too, but it would be
> > nice if you could give us an estimation of the work needed to move the
> > resize code to libntfs ?
It isn't only abo
Flatcap are working on insert the ntfs tools (ntfsresize is a part of
it) in the usable library libntfs but need help.
You can find it on irc.freenode.net #ntfs channel or at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
address.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
* Anton Altaparmakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-21 16:25]:
> I am afraid I have no idea as I haven't really looked at the ntfsresize
> code. I am CC:-ing Szaka who wrote and maintains ntfsresize in the hope
> that he will comments.
BTW, it would be really excellent to get this merged into libpa
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 16:14, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:25:28PM +, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 15:23, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:15:35PM +, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 02:27:12PM -
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:25:28PM +, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 15:23, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:15:35PM +, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 02:27:12PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 15:23, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:15:35PM +, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 02:27:12PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:24:06PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > > > > > NTFS write support at
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:15:35PM +, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 02:27:12PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:24:06PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > > > > NTFS write support at the kernel level is not very well-tested, but
> > > > > >
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 02:27:12PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:24:06PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > > > NTFS write support at the kernel level is not very well-tested, but
> > > > > > resizing partitions with the userspace tools is something that gets used
>
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 10:02:14PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> Still, i wonder what the use of many outside library would mean to
> libparted and its use in debian-installer, where size matters.
It is not necessary for libparted to depend strongly on libntfs but
the same way as on libreiserfs.
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 05:52:53PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 10:02:14PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > > > But is not in any way related to the libntfs library ?
>
> > > Package: ntfstools
> > > Source: linux-ntfs
> > > Version: 1.8.0-2
> > > Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2
Suse 9.0 YaST (Yet another Setup Tool) uses NTfsresize in the
installation process as soon as Mandrake Diskdrake
(http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/mlf/ezaz/ntfsresize.html#static).
If we know that Fedora/Redhat don't include support for ntfs partitions
for some "politic" licensing issues, there could be
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 10:02:14PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > But is not in any way related to the libntfs library ?
> > Package: ntfstools
> > Source: linux-ntfs
> > Version: 1.8.0-2
> > Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4), libntfs5 (>= 1.8.0)
> > I haven't looked at the source to know which p
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:02:16PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:41:34PM +0100, Thorsten Sauter wrote:
> > * Fabri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-19 18:52]:
> > > Any plan on support ntfs resize in the new debian installer?
> > > Any update or plan on gtk frontends to d-i
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:25:45PM +0100, Bluefuture wrote:
> I can try to give some help... if my poor english can let me collaborate
> with the other d-i developers.
>
> ntfsresize (into nfstools debian package) is mature and is also
> successful used in other distro to make dual boot when winxp
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:24:06PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > NTFS write support at the kernel level is not very well-tested, but
> > > > resizing partitions with the userspace tools is something that gets used
> > > > fairly frequently.
> > > So, there is NTFS resizing user space tool ? An
On Mon Jan 19, 2004 at 09:24:06PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Yes, it's the tool named "ntfsresize" that the original poster was
> > referring to, and it's found in the ntfstools package.
>
> But is not in any way related to the libntfs library ?
$ dlocate /usr/sbin/ntfsresize
ntfstools: /usr/s
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 02:27:12PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:24:06PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > > NTFS write support at the kernel level is not very well-tested, but
> > > > > resizing partitions with the userspace tools is something that gets used
> > > > > f
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 01:37:31PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:33:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 01:29:01PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:22:13PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 06:52
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:33:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 01:29:01PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:22:13PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 06:52:50PM +0100, Fabri wrote:
> > > > Any plan on support ntfs resize in the
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 01:29:01PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:22:13PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 06:52:50PM +0100, Fabri wrote:
> > > Any plan on support ntfs resize in the new debian installer?
>
> > There has been some discussion in the
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:22:13PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 06:52:50PM +0100, Fabri wrote:
> > Any plan on support ntfs resize in the new debian installer?
> There has been some discussion in the parted mailing list about linking
> libparted with libntfs and provide adv
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:41:34PM +0100, Thorsten Sauter wrote:
> * Fabri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-19 18:52]:
> > Any plan on support ntfs resize in the new debian installer?
> >
> > Any update or plan on gtk frontends to d-i and an integration with
> > bootsplash (bootsplash packages are no
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 06:52:50PM +0100, Fabri wrote:
> Any plan on support ntfs resize in the new debian installer?
There has been some discussion in the parted mailing list about linking
libparted with libntfs and provide advanced ntfs functionality.
That said, it seems that libntfs doesn't p
* Fabri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-19 18:52]:
| Any plan on support ntfs resize in the new debian installer?
|
| Any update or plan on gtk frontends to d-i and an integration with
| bootsplash (bootsplash packages are now on debian mentors repos)?
any plan to help us writing a gtk frontend? or
59 matches
Mail list logo
