how not to initialize HD
Tom H
tomh0665 at gmail.com
Sun Aug 1 07:06:01 UTC 2010
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 2:52 PM, JB <jb.123abc at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Tom H <tomh0665 <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 2:25 PM, JB <jb.123abc <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > JB <jb.123abc <at> yahoo.com> writes:
>> >
>> > # fdisk -l
>> > ...
>> > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
>> > /dev/sda1 * 1 4462 35840983+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
>> > /dev/sda2 4463 4717 2048287+ e W95 FAT16 (LBA)
>> > /dev/sda3 4718 12162 59793409 5 Extended
>> > Partition 3 does not end on cylinder boundary.
>> > /dev/sda5 4718 5961 9989120 83 Linux
>> > /dev/sda6 5962 8094 17133291 83 Linux
>> > /dev/sda7 11919 12162 1951744 82 Linux swap/Solaris
>> > /dev/sda8 8095 11918 30716248+ c W95 FAT32 (LBA)
>> >
>> sda3 can be an extended partition.
>
> Tom,
> I was not sure about it ... I thought that might confuse the partition table
> layout logic. I wanted to make it "by the book" as much as possible.
> OK. Let's assume that your are right. That would not necessitate touching
> sda2 with W95 FAT16.
>
> Paul, you are following the thread, are you :-) .
>
> Tom,
> now there is a problem with Extended partition ending on 12162 boundary, which
> is end of sda7, and not sda8 as it should be.
> What do you think can we do to fold sda8 into that Extended partition without
> remaking the Extended partition entirely ?
> Perhaps we can fool it (or it is the right thing to do ...) by saving sda8
> (W95 FAT32) contents somewhere (like I suggested previously for sda2) and
> delete sda8. Would that fix the table (at least so it would become workable).
> After that we could try a trick again by incorporating that free space into
> sda7 so that allignments would be correct once again.
> What do you think ?
As a concrete example, Debian (and therefore Ubuntu), in its default
set up, mounts / on sda1 and swap on sda5 (with sda2 as an extended
partition) so having sda3 rather than sda4 as an extended partition
isn't a problem.
The sda7/sda8 situation is strange but I have seen it before and don't
think that it is a problem. I would want to change it because I would
rather have an fdisk output that looks more "normal"/"logical" but it
wouldn't be a technical decision.
The problem might be that there is no free space but the installed
must have some kind of warning for that (surely!).
More information about the users
mailing list