Robert Millan wrote:
With this approach, the burden is no longer in GRUB. Then I don't care
how weird disk layouts can become, because GRUB doesn't have to probe
them. We can even support things like this if it makes users happy:
(hd0,bsd2,msdos1,sun1,apple4,msdos1)
I like this generic ap
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:31:35AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> When you hide complexity from the user, the user doesn't generally care or
> want to understand what this involves. When we accept "(hd0,1)" from the
> user, it implies we know what's the partition label in hd0, but reality is
> that
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 06:38:40PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I like this idea, but wonder if it would be useful to have something
> like (grub drive, partition type, filesystem type) for each partition to
> consider. For example:
>
> (hd0,gpt1,ext2)
Filesystems have essentially the same pro
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:20:49PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> > With this approach, the burden is no longer in GRUB. Then I don't care
> > how weird disk layouts can become, because GRUB doesn't have to probe
> > them.
> We still have to for partition_iterate.
partit
2010/1/25 Bruce Dubbs :
> Robert Millan wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 07:03:21PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
>> With this approach, the burden is no longer in GRUB. Then I don't care
>> how weird disk layouts can become, because GRUB doesn't have to probe
>> them. We can even suppor
Robert Millan wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 07:03:21PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
Partition types are easily screwed. Why not just check for the presence
of the label?
I have a feeling I already explained this somewhere. Doesn't seem to be in
this thread, maybe on
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 07:03:21PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
> Serbinenko wrote:
>
>>> This can be done by extending "has_partitions" to be set to "yes" in those
>>> specific partition types. The implementation should be the least intrusive
>>> possible, taking i
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:43:09AM -0800, Seth Goldberg wrote:
>
> The UEFI specification specifies support for nested MSDOS labels (MSDOS
> labels that include partitions in which another MSDOS partition table can
> be nested). This is not talking just about extended partitions, but
> about
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 07:03:21PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> > This can be done by extending "has_partitions" to be set to "yes" in those
> > specific partition types. The implementation should be the least intrusive
> > possible, taking into account that this kind of
Hi,
Quoting Robert Millan, who wrote the following on Fri, 22 Jan 2010:
I haven't checked the specific details, but I think this approach is fine IF
we only recurse for partition types where this makes sense. This includes:
- BSD partition types inside MSDOS labels
- Solaris partition type
Robert Millan wrote:
> I haven't checked the specific details, but I think this approach is fine IF
> we only recurse for partition types where this makes sense. This includes:
>
> - BSD partition types inside MSDOS labels
> - Solaris partition type inside MSDOS labels
>
What with minix?
>
I haven't checked the specific details, but I think this approach is fine IF
we only recurse for partition types where this makes sense. This includes:
- BSD partition types inside MSDOS labels
- Solaris partition type inside MSDOS labels
This can be done by extending "has_partitions" to be
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 01:13:11AM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
> > wrote:
> >> On Robert's request I write about the usage cases I'm aware. It's by
>
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>> On Robert's request I write about the usage cases I'm aware. It's by
>> no means complete
>>
>> 1) bsdlabel on PC-style. By most *BSD flavours
>> 2) sunpc on PC-
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> On Robert's request I write about the usage cases I'm aware. It's by
> no means complete
>
> 1) bsdlabel on PC-style. By most *BSD flavours
> 2) sunpc on PC-style. By Solaris
> 3) Some kind on PC-style on PC-style by
Typo:
+ grub_util_error ("Installing on doubly nested partitiond is "
--S
Quoting Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko, who wrote the following on Mon, 24...:
Rediff
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:57 AM, Vladimir 'phcoder'
Serbinenko wrote:
Rediff
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Vla
On Robert's request I write about the usage cases I'm aware. It's by
no means complete
1) bsdlabel on PC-style. By most *BSD flavours
2) sunpc on PC-style. By Solaris
3) Some kind on PC-style on PC-style by Minix. (not sure about this
one -it was a long time ago)
I vaguely heard of (I may be compl
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 03:00:52PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>> Rediff and few fixes
>
> Please note that after what we discussed on IRC, we need to find a solution
> that wouldn't make boot time increase linearly with the nu
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 03:00:52PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Rediff and few fixes
Please note that after what we discussed on IRC, we need to find a solution
that wouldn't make boot time increase linearly with the number of filesystems
or partmaps GRUB supports.
I really think
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 12:44:37AM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> >
> > Btw, does this bugfix depend on the rest of nested partition changes?
> >
> Actually only superficially
> > + disk->partition = p->parent;
> this line would be = 0; without nestpart patch. If you want I
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 12:09:32AM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>> >> + grub_device_close (dev);
>> >
>> > I don't think we should allow chainload at all in partitions other than
>> > msdos
>> > ones. There's no existing
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 12:17 AM, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 09:48:21PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>
>> The proble it doesn't solve is when 2 partition labels pretend to
>> describe the same region. Solaris during install dd'es MBR to its
>> partition that it su
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 12:09:32AM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> >> + grub_device_close (dev);
> >
> > I don't think we should allow chainload at all in partitions other than
> > msdos
> > ones. There's no existing use of this for other labels "in the wild", and
> > we
> > s
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 09:48:21PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>
> The proble it doesn't solve is when 2 partition labels pretend to
> describe the same region. Solaris during install dd'es MBR to its
> partition that it subdivides in further paritions. This way the
> parition seem
>> + grub_device_close (dev);
>
> I don't think we should allow chainload at all in partitions other than msdos
> ones. There's no existing use of this for other labels "in the wild", and we
> shouldn't encourage it to appear IMO.
Actually it's something which happens with GPT. Suppose you ha
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:52:37PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> @@ -94,10 +95,28 @@ grub_chainloader_cmd (const char *filename,
> grub_chainloader_flags_t flags)
>dev = grub_device_open (0);
>if (dev && dev->disk && dev->disk->partition)
> {
> - grub_disk_read (d
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Vladimir 'phcoder'
Serbinenko wrote:
>>> What makes this experimental and dangerous? Can you send in a patch
>>> that isn't?
>> Only that I touch core size
> *core functionality
>> and when I submitted it, it was only few
>> days old. Now I use it for over a month
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Marco Gerards wrote:
> "Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko" writes:
>
>> Rediff
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Vladimir 'phcoder'
>> Serbinenko wrote:
>>> Hello. Here is a first version of nested partition support. Beware
>>> it's EXPERIMENTAL and may be dagerou
28 matches
Mail list logo
