Re: partition table numberings
Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello People,
>
> Following is my concern,
>
> - -------------------
> laptop:~# fdisk -l /dev/hda
>
> Disk /dev/hda: 30.0 GB, 30005821440 bytes
> 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3648 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/hda1 1 18 144553+ 83 Linux
> /dev/hda2 * 19 444 3421845 b W95 FAT32
> /dev/hda3 445 3648 25736130 5 Extended
> /dev/hda5 445 507 506016 82 Linux swap
> /dev/hda6 508 1966 11719386 83 Linux
> /dev/hda7 2514 3648 9116856 83 Linux
> /dev/hda8 2159 2513 2851506 83 Linux
> /dev/hda9 1967 2158 1542208+ 82 Linux swap
>
> Partition table entries are not in disk order
> laptop:~#
> - --------------------
>
> Is this something to worry about? I just modified my partition table using
> parted to make a new swap partition. Previously / was /dev/hda8 and now
> it's /dev/hda7. Everything is working fine for me.
>
> Just the message, "Partition table entries are not in disk order".
> Is it something to worry about? Will it slowly damage my disk?
Just the fact that the logical partitions are not in disk order won't
cause any problems for Linux. That's the result of how fdisk (and I
guess parted too) handles things in an extended partition when you
delete a volume that's not last, and then create a new one. It puts the
newest volume last in the logical chain, even though it's not last on
the disk.
Most non-Linux partitioning programs will not do that, so the only thing
I can say is that some non-Linux partitioning programs such as PM may
not like it if you tried to use it on that disk. But probably you don't
use any since you used parted for this job.
Tom
Reply to: