Re: Bug#80325: how compact, vanilla and fdisk see the partition table
Paul.Chr@t-online.de (Chris Paul) writes:
> Hi Thomas,
> as You might have seen I encountered a similar problem)
>
> I also dont understand everything you said:
> > ... The difference is that 'compact' ignores some Linux
> > partitions on the extended partition.
> Are You sure? Did you try to mount and list contents of one of
> these? I am sure that the installer inserts 4 partitons (your 4 bsd
> slices) where 1 (primary partition) would be correct. If you
> temporarily would change the type-id of your BSD partition
> (e.g. with fdisk, t, to something like "56 Golden Bow") and see if
> the installer then works. Thats the way I did it... (hint: dont
> forget to issue a fdisk -l | lpr before, and keep this paper, ...)
> This would be one answer Adam's questions concerning BSD disklabel
> support in the kernels/flavors and whether your SCSI disks behave
> similar to IDE I have. I will also CC you my "Sunday afternoon
> work", submission of "...further information on (my) problem..." as
> Debian Bugs database admin Darren Benham writes, for your
> information. What do you think of it? (Now, after doing/writing all
> that stuff, I strongly blieve that I didnt have any problem at
> all/but I know, bug reports are important...)
Paul, you seem pretty knowledgable. You say you didn't have any
problems -- which flavor of disks di you try? It would really help me
out if you could see if the idepci or compact flavor (doesn't matter)
work ok, in addition to the "vanilla" flavor. I am concerned that the BSD
disklabel is not enabled in the compact and idepci kernels, and that
is a pretty bad bug. But I wanna confirm it's a problem before filing
an important bug against those kernels.
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: