[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Multiple partition maps
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: Multiple partition maps |
Date: |
Thu, 4 Sep 2008 21:40:15 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 08:08:50PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
> Hello. I was looking at the grub code and seen that if a disk has
> multiple partition tables (e.g. macintel with bootcamp) then only first
> one will be detected. In some cases it can lead to unreachable
> partitions if for some reason partition is present only in one table.
> Does anyone has an idea how theese cases may be treated compactly and
> efficiently?
Strictly speaking, GPT+MSDOS hybrid tables are a violation of the GPT
specification. It's not clear what would be the "correct" way of handling
them.
Since we're not a legacy program, I suppose the sane thing to do would be
to abort MSDOS probing if a protective DOS partition (0xee) is found, and
then only GPT will be used.
Isn't this what GRUB does already? I thought it would be...
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
- Multiple partition maps, phcoder, 2008/09/03
- Re: Multiple partition maps,
Robert Millan <=
- Re: Multiple partition maps, phcoder, 2008/09/04
- Re: Multiple partition maps, phcoder, 2008/09/04
- Re: Multiple partition maps, Robert Millan, 2008/09/08
- Re: Multiple partition maps, phcoder, 2008/09/08
- Re: Multiple partition maps, Robert Millan, 2008/09/08
- Re: Multiple partition maps, phcoder, 2008/09/08
- [PATCH] Re: Multiple partition maps, phcoder, 2008/09/08
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Multiple partition maps, Robert Millan, 2008/09/09
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Multiple partition maps, phcoder, 2008/09/09