Opinions about MAXIMUM_PARTS crippling in util-linux-2.11r-miscfixes.patch

[James Olin Oden]

On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, DAVID BALAZIC wrote:

> James Olin Oden <joden at malachi.lee.k12.nc.us> wrote :
> 
> > > On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Wojtek Pilorz wrote:
> > >
> > > > Would something so simple as to check whether the name specified matches
> > > > .*/hd[a-l] and only then allow up to 60 partitions would be acceptable for
> > > > inclusion in RHL?
> > >
> > > There are too many exceptions for the rule to be useful.
> > >
> > > I know it's a pain for the three people who have a need for more than 16
> > You could add one other person that would be interested in this feature (-;.
> > 
> > Seriously, what would be an acceptable check for this.  Is there a for
> > sure way of looking at something in /proc, or using an ioctl to verify
> > that a drive is an ide drive?  If so, I or the person originally emailing
> > would be happy to code such a patch.
> 
> I think that is the user does not know he is partitioning an IDE drive,
> then he should partition at all. When you make above 16 partitions, you usually
> have the neccessary amount of IQ to know, IMHO :-)
>
Don't care about the user, I want the fdisk program to allow the maximum
partitions on a per drive basis.  I realized after I wrote this the easy 
check to add into fdisk that would be correct IMHO is to check the major
number of the device given.  Knowing this it knows what device driver is 
controlling the disk and thus how many partitions it supports.

Cheers...james