--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Assertion failure with confusion between Linux and driver descriptor |
|
Date: |
Wed, 16 Sep 2015 06:47:29 +0000 |
Hello,
parted just crashed on me and told me I have to report the bug. :)
I have a USB memory stick that I want to repartition.
parted complained, with a "Ignore/Cancel" prompt. I am
reminded of MS-DOS:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abort,_Retry,_Fail%3F
Possibly an improved error message would be a good idea?
Anyway, I chose "i" for ignore on the first run. However this results
in an incorrect size for the USB stick, which I know is 16 GB.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
address@hidden:~/tmp$ sudo parted /dev/sdb
GNU Parted 3.2
Using /dev/sdb
Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands.
(parted) p
Warning: The driver descriptor says the physical block size is 2048 bytes, but
Linux says it is 512 bytes.
Ignore/Cancel? i
Model: General USB Flash Disk (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 64,5GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 2048B/512B
Partition Table: mac
Disk Flags:
Number Start End Size File system Name Flags
1 2048B 6143B 4096B Apple
2 1853kB 2279kB 426kB EFI
(parted) q
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So I tried again, picking "c" for cancel, because why not?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
address@hidden:~/tmp$ sudo parted /dev/sdb
GNU Parted 3.2
Using /dev/sdb
Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands.
(parted) p
Warning: The driver descriptor says the physical block size is 2048 bytes, but
Linux says it is 512 bytes.
Ignore/Cancel? c
Model: General USB Flash Disk (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 16,1GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: unknown
Disk Flags:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay. Better, I guess? Probably I should have paid more attention, as the "i"
for ignore version at least could read a partition table. :)
Anyway, I proceeded to try a new partition:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
(parted) n
Warning: The driver descriptor says the physical block size is 2048 bytes, but
Linux says it is 512 bytes.
Ignore/Cancel? c
Partition number?
Partition number? 1
Backtrace has 8 calls on stack:
8: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libparted.so.2(ped_assert+0x44) [0x7f4cbbd7f644]
7: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libparted.so.2(+0x11d65) [0x7f4cbbd83d65]
6: parted(command_line_get_partition+0x4d) [0x40b67d]
5: parted() [0x4078f2]
4: parted(interactive_mode+0xff) [0x40ca2f]
3: parted(main+0x119f) [0x405f6f]
2: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf5) [0x7f4cbb576b45]
1: parted() [0x405fc7]
You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do:
.
.
.
Assertion (disk != NULL) at ../../libparted/disk.c:1598 in function
ped_disk_get_partition() failed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is with Debian Stretch (currently testing).
Kernel details from "uname -a":
Linux pallas 4.1.0-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.1.6-1 (2015-08-23) x86_64 GNU/Linux
Cheers,
--
Shane
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#21494: Assertion failure with confusion between Linux and driver descriptor |
|
Date: |
Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:04:28 -0400 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 |
On 9/16/2015 2:47 AM, Shane Kerr wrote:
> Anyway, I proceeded to try a new partition:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (parted) n
n is for name, to name a partition. To create a new one you use mkpart.
> Warning: The driver descriptor says the physical block size is 2048 bytes, but
> Linux says it is 512 bytes.
> Ignore/Cancel? c
> Partition number?
> Partition number? 1
> Backtrace has 8 calls on stack:
Brian fixed this already not too long ago, it just hasn't been released yet:
commit f5c628dd51c7d77ff939554425159ab6e8aef1c0
Author: Brian C. Lane <address@hidden>
Date: Mon Jul 13 16:43:11 2015 -0700
parted: Fix crash with name command and no disklabel (#1226067)
A typo (the last I think) from commit 7eac058 wasn't properly checking
the result of ped_disk_new so it could crash if there was no disklabel
on the device.
--- End Message ---