On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 05:43:30PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 10:35:02AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 05:12:54PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 10:08:28AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 02:47:04PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > > Would parted also work ? Not as per see, since parted is not really user > > > > > friendly, but when using a (graphical) libparted frontend ? > > > > Anything that understands BSD disklabels and is assailable by the user > > > > is fine. Today, that means fdisk. When something better becomes > > > > available (I've also filed a wishlist requesting BSD disklabel support > > > > from cfdisk), the script can be changed. > > > Parted should work also. In i took the disk_bsd.c file as an example > > > when writing the amiga partitioning support in libparted. Could you > > > perhaps test parted 1.6.6 and confirm this to us, as i don't have the > > > hardware for it. > > A quick test with parted shows that it does understand an existing BSD > > disklabel. Quickly glancing through the options didn't show me a way to > > initialize a disklabel on a fresh disk, though? > mklabel should do you a fresh disk (mklabel bsd) and mkpart should > enable you to add partitions (and mkpartfs or mkfs to add filesystems). From > the source, there is definitively code there to create the partition > labels. Then that should be fine, once the parted frontend you mentioned becomes available. In the meantime, fdisk still seems to be the correct solution here. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgppTHQNmSCJh.pgp
Description: PGP signature