On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 10:24:48AM -0700, Andrew Sharp wrote: > > mac-fdisk is no longer broken, lets not fix it until it is. > > I had occassion to experience the broken mac-fdisk not too long > ago. It wasn't all that catastrophic, was it? I don't need to be > Einstein to realize that my 9.1gig disk isn't really 456gig. Just that as i have said, is fixed in mac-fdisk 0.1-6 which is in both woody and potato-proposed-updates. > went to /var/log/messages and got the real size and put it in there > as an argument. Worked fine. I noticed that there was a bug filed > against it a long time ago so there was no reason to even bring it > up. That's why they have the capacity argument in there, right? > ~:^) One of those little things that just isn't annoying enough is > that it could so easily supply reasonable defaults without you > having to do the math yourself all the time, especially the which it does now. > "beginning block" argument. Most people don't use overlapping > partitions, except in sparc land, and mac-fdisk probably won't let > you anyway, so what's the dileo? If it was just a little bit more > annoying I'd go change it myself. Time for a nap instead, I think. every fdisk implementation i have seen let you choose the starting block, it makes sense if you for some reason want to leave a `hole' of free space on the disk. unlike apple's useless tools mac-fdisk will allow you to do this without silly placeholder partitions. just use the shortcuts: print the table, look for the Apple_Free where you want the next partition to start use its partition number like so: startblock: 2p see http://penguinppc.org/usr/ybin/doc/mac-fdisk-basics.shtml -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Attachment:
pgphDsI0983D6.pgp
Description: PGP signature