[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?
From: |
H. J. Lu |
Subject: |
Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs? |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Aug 2002 08:35:41 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.2.5.1i |
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 02:41:20PM +1000, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 03:11:13PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > See
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72686
> >
> > My question why parted even bothers with number of cylinders > 1024
> > for legacy stuff. Linux's fdisk doesn't. Here is a patch.
>
> cylinders > 1024 is a bad heuristic. (What does hard disk size have
> to do with the BIOS version?)
>
My questions are what "legacy" is and if it supports cylinders > 1024.
As far as I know, the "legacy" BIOS doesn't support cylinders > 1024.
You can't use the "legacy" BIOS with cylinders > 1024.
H.J.
- Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, H. J. Lu, 2002/08/26
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, Pixel, 2002/08/27
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, Andrew Clausen, 2002/08/28
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?,
H. J. Lu <=
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, Andrew Clausen, 2002/08/28
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, H. J. Lu, 2002/08/28
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, Andrew Clausen, 2002/08/29
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, H. J. Lu, 2002/08/29
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, Andrew Clausen, 2002/08/29
- Re: Why check legacy partition table for non-legacy HDs?, H. J. Lu, 2002/08/30