http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/show_bug.cgi?id=5942
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-25-09 12:29 ------- Ah... this is what happened: * the partition hda5 was created as the root partition * all pre-existing partitions number 5 and up were incremented in number * swap was allocated at the end, at hda11 (see also my bug report #5943) * /usr was allocated at the end, at hda12 Now, am I mistaken, or is it plain weird that the root partition was created as the first extended partition? Shouldn't it have been at the end, along with the other partitions? Its sequence number does not matter much, at best its physicial location, right? Please note that hda5, hda11 and hda12 share space that was acquired from hda2, and that lies outside the region of the extended partition. It works, but it scares me somewhat. -- Configure bugmail: http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ------- Reminder: ------- assigned_to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: UNCONFIRMED creation_date: description: I just installed MDK 9.2-rc2 on a system with more Linux and Windows partitions on it. I used the "split my Windows partition" option to split hda2 among Windows and MDK. There was no hda3, but hda4 was extended and had several more partitions. Diskdrake correctly allocated new partitions and even worked close-to-intuitive, but it did manage to renumber partitions 5 and up, so that other installations got frustrated. I suppose it was the intention to avoid that, having seen that the new partitions are allocated high-end numbers (hda11, hda12).
