Re: partition types (again :)

[Andrew Clausen]

Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> > Weird!  The firmware is broken then, since DOS partition tables
> > have a separate flag for "bootable".
> 
> It's broken in a few ways. Unfortunately assigning it that label doesn't
> change much... :)

:-(
 
> No, it seems to have it right (if lacking details):
> "41 PPC PReP (Power PC Reference Platform) Boot"

Ooops, I was looking at 42.

> > Anyway, Parted can't manipulate the low-level partition type.
> > To manipulate this, we would need to add another flag, or
> > file system, or something.
> 
> That's what I was afraid of... will that functionality ever happen?

OK, I'm convinced.  Added to the list.  This would be done in
parrallel with flags... users should only be exposed to this
as a last resort, IMHO.

> As
> others have noted, whether we like them or not these partition types can be
> important to various BIOS (the other example I just skimmed was someone's
> APM depending on a RAM-on-disk partition iirc)...

yes.

> I understand that it seems to break your model. :( Both personally (as a
> user) and for an installer (which current uses only parted) I need to be
> able to create these partitions. I can probably work around it, I just dream
> of using parted all the time. ;)

Well, we can (and should) keep adding flags, IMHO.

I'll do this soonish (still settuping up my machine properly, after
returning to .au)

Andrew Clausen