On Feb 29, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Nathan Coulson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Andrew Benton wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks to your message I've spent some time playing with gpt today
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table
>>> and I now think there's a good case for putting gptfdisk into LFS.
>>> fdisk and cfdisk are installed in LFS but if you have a GUID partition
>>> table they're no use. I think gptfdisk should be in LFS.
>>
>> What about parted which is already in BLFS?
>>
>> Actually, I think BLFS may be good enough. We would need parted on the
>> host system. If we need it after we boot into LFS, it can be built via
>> BLFS.
Assuming LFS isn't the host...
>> Also, util-linux plans to add GPT support into fdisk in version 2.22.
>> That's probably six months away.
>>
>> I'm open to gptfdisk, but would like to see more discussion.
>>
>> -- Bruce
>
> for myself, I have always liked fdisk's style to parted, which is
> probably why I went to gptfdisk all those years ago. If I recall,
> parted has less control over the partition types then fdisk/gptfdisk
> (ex:/ I couldn't make a boot partition). that was a year or two ago
> though...
May want to consider whether or not LFS should be a sufficient enough system to
build itself (say, from a live-cd). That would argue for a partitioner that
can handle the current disk sizes. +1 for fdisk-style interface.
Q
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
