Strange parted behaviour

[Chris Murphy]

On Aug 8, 2014, at 10:38 AM, Rick Stevens <ricks at alldigital.com> wrote:
> I don't think "uboot" is a valid partition type--it should be
> "primary", "logical" or "extended". Thus the format of the command
> should have been:

Since the disk is GPT there's no such distinction among partitions. Behavior wise they're primary partitions, and on-disk they're most like primary partitions, but it's better to just say they're partitions with no distinction.


> 
> 	# parted /dev/sdb mkpart primary ext3 4 516
> 	# parted /dev/sdb name 1 uboot
> 
> I've noticed that parted sometimes makes some weird decisions if
> parameters it expects are missing or mis-specified.

Yes. It's designed to be stable: if you update parted from 2.0 to 3.1, chances are your app will still do the partitioning portion correctly. But if you're a mortal user looking for an interface that accurately communicates facts bidirectionally, parted is eyebrow raising.



Chris Murphy