Indeed I started the discussion with Jessie (8.4), but then found out my cape is not supported under 4.x kernel, so switched to Wheezy (7.9). I then tried expanding the SD card partition on the SD card with the 7.9 image according to the instructions, and got the SD card into the trouble described above.
The FAT32 partition appears to be part of the 7.9 image. On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 12:26:43 PM UTC-7, William Hermans wrote: > > > So, why do you state "Robert's Debian images have not used a two >> partition >> > layout in quite some times now"? Please explain. There were two >> partitions >> > on the SD card that I flashed with the 7.9 image above. The smaller >> > partition was the FAT32 one that shows up as a drive in Windows if I >> connect >> > the Beaglebone to a Windows host with a USB cable. This smaller >> partition >> > has mostly getting-started documents. >> >> On newer image's we use an *.img file instead of a hard-coded fat32 >> partition... >> > > I'm adding on to what Robert has already said. It's been a long time since > there were two paritions on any Debian image. The main reason as I > understand it is that there was a ~100M FAT partition because MLO, and > u-boot.img needed a place to live. Passed that, g_multi( g_mass_storage ) > *has to have* a path to export, so since the FAT partition was already > needed, it was also used for that purpose. > > But a long time ago, I do not remember exact time frame, but Robert > probably could. Robert did away with the FAT partition because a lot of > inexperienced people were deleting files, and causing their boards being > unable to boot. This was done by putting MLO / u-boot.img into the MBR of > the disk. So for a long time there was no FAT partition, and only one ext4 > partition. As far as how Robert dealt with g_multi needing a path . .. yeah > I do not know, or care. I do not use it. > > Anyway, you have a "real" FAT living right here: > > > NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT > sdb1 8:17 1 96M 0 part /media/vladimir/BEAGLEBONE > > How or why, I do not know, and yes I suppose that could be an ext4 > partition, but that would make far less sense. I'm pretty sure thats a FAT > partition. > > -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/eeaaac17-4261-4bee-b972-d1b8686e0274%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
