On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 02:18:59PM +0100, A Mennucc wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 12:41:39PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 12:21:51PM +0100, A Mennucc wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 11:37:36AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:36:07AM +0100, A Mennucc wrote: > > > > > Package: parted > > > > > Version: 1.6.21-1 > > > > > Severity: important > > > > > I have a USB memory stick; I have created one partition on it; > > > > > the current layout is > > > > > btw: I doubt there is any vfat data around : I filled > > > the partition with my data almost completely > > > > The magic marker for fat partition is probably kept, it is just one sector, > > and probably living outside the ext2 accessible data or something. > > > > > > How do you create the ext2 partition anyway ? > > > > > > with 'cfdisk /dev/sda' ; then I did 'mkfs.ext2 /dev/sda1' > > > > If you had created the ext2 filesystem with parted, it would probably have > > clobbered the old fat on it, not sure though. > > before I used cfdisk, the usb stick was 'partionless' : > /dev/sda itself was one big fat partition
Ok, exact that then, there is some remnant of that fat filesystem in unused places of your stick. > > > my usb stick works perfectly well with : > > > fdisk, cfdisk , mount, etc etc > > > > Sure, but you can't use those for resizing. > > that is currently my problem bad luck. you could look at where those fat remnant are, and purge them by hand. Or rebuild a parted with the order of ext/vat inversed, or simply removed fat support. look at libparted/libparted.c i think. > > Something more clever could > > (and maybe should) be done, but this is a post-sarge issue which we need to > > convince upstream of, and would probably require a not-so-small redesign. > > Maybe for parted 1.7 or something. > > Unless other people get bitten while > installing sarge. We will see. You are free to take the matter upstream. parted for sarge is already in deep-freeze, so i doubt changes of this magnitude will make it in. > > > parted is the only program being fouled > > > > Because the other blindly follow the partition table. Now if you had changed > > the partition type in the partition table erroneously, parted would not be > > fouled, but the others would, so ... > > I see it the opposite way . The other tools use the standard > approach of looking at the type, and they work OK. > > parted tries to be smarter than the rest, and fails. Ok. > so this is a bug in parted Convince upstream about this please. > the best behaviour should be: > 1) parted looks at the type in the partition table > 2) parted looks inside the partition and tries to guess > 3) if the two guesses do not match, parted asks politely Yep, indeed. but as said a not-so-small redesign (including probably an ABI/API change) of parted is needed for that, so definitively post-sarge. I would even add : 4) allow for manual setting of the dostype, as well as inspection. I had some disagreement with upstream about this, but it cannot be done in the current stable branch. Patches welcome as always though, and i would be happy if you could prove me wrong on this. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
