[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Processed: nope...



> > > > reassign 33798 boot-floppies
> > > Bug#33798: Bug in base package for PowerPC
> > > Bug reassigned from package `makedev' to `boot-floppies'.
> > 
> > Hey, before you doing here a 'ping-pong':-)
> > 
> > This is a generic problem!! What/Where is the best place to
> > generate 12 or 14 partitions on hda or sda and on hdb/sdb, ... ? 
> > boot-floppies or makedev ???
> 
> For quite some time, the default behaviour of makedev when asked to create
> an hda or sda device has been to create 16 partitions for the sd device, and
> 20 partitions for the hd device.  The bug report in question claimed that the
> base system was shipping with only 8 partitions for the hd devices, and so I
> must assume that either the boot/base stuff was using an older makedev, or
> that something unusual was being done to get such a short list of partitions.

Is this bug already closed? If not: please close it. 

But the MAKEDEV has two other bugs:

+ /dev/MAKEDEV st0
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
+ cd /var/tmp/root-tmp-7022/dev
+ /dev/MAKEDEV st1
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
/dev/MAKEDEV: unit: command not found
+ /dev/MAKEDEV adb
chown: :: can not omit both user and group
chown: :: can not omit both user and group


st[0-7])
        major=`Major st 9`
        unit=`suffix $arg st`
        makedev st$unit   c $major $unit $tape
        makedev nst$unit  c $major `math 128 + $unit` $tape


# ADB bus devices (char)
        makedev adb c 56 0
        makedev adbmouse c 10 10


Both looks good for me -- bdale: any idea for this?  Possible a
chroot problem ?



Thanks,

    Hartmut


Reply to: