Here is the input data that I used as part of this MP: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/TfpvN2bdVB/
> Should we preserve [last-lba and table-size] too? This line of questioning is good, thanks for raising the topic. I preserved only the values that were different in that dump. last-lba: "Specify the last usable sector for GPT partitions." sfdisk appears to be doing a good job on this, and presumably this is low risk due to the trailing 1MiB section at the end of the disk. But suppose some software reports a lower value? This sounds like it might be having magic data in unpartitioned space, and attempting to use the last-lba value to declare it an unused zone. I think we should preserve last-lba. table-length: "Specify the maximal number of GPT partitions." sfdisk defaults this to 128 and doesn't include this in the --dump output unless it has a non-default value. This could be like last-lba, where another OS might decide to use a different value? And be grumpy if different? Safer to preserve, though I would be surprised if the value is ever different. > Should the disk action allow setting any of the > label-id/first-lba/last-lba/table-size options? I suspect some OS are identifying the disk by label-id. Setting a specific value might be useful but seems pretty niche. I think the others are too esoteric to try to be proactive about. As you say, we can add if asked. I support including label-id as a configurable item, but suggest we not bother with the others. -- https://code.launchpad.net/~dbungert/curtin/+git/curtin/+merge/426651 Your team curtin developers is subscribed to branch curtin:master. -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~curtin-dev Post to : curtin-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~curtin-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
