On Friday 11 February 2011, 22:21:18 Milko Krachounov wrote: > What I'm suggesting that parted reads the partition table with more strict > constraints so that such situations are avoided. Or are read with less > strict constraints (with the appropriate warnings) so that the table can > be edited and fixed. On a second thought my original suggestion as to how > to do this doesn't sound like a great idea, and I was wrong about the > actual walk over the partitions. >
Excuse me, I was writing in a bit of a hurry, and the sentences didn't come out alright. I meant to say that I'm suggesting that parted creates the partition table with more strict constraints while reading it with less strict ones (with the appropriate warnings), thus making bad partition tables like that less likely and allowing the user to fix it with parted. Or at the very least give a more informative error, because I couldn't figure what's going on without reading the source code.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ bug-parted mailing list bug-parted@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-parted
