On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:02:05AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 09:22:11PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 09:00:36PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko > > wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Robert Millan<r...@aybabtu.com> wrote: > > > > I'm not sure there's much we can do about this. Using heuristics > > > > sounds like > > > > it will make the solution worse than the problem. I don't care much > > > > about > > > > Microsoft filesystems, but I'd hate to see GRUB fail on a completely > > > > sane > > > > ext3 inside msdos label because it happened to look like FAT in raw > > > > disk at > > > > the same time. > > > > > > The approach proposed by Collin avoids such problems since correct > > > pc_partition_map is always detected as such. > > > > I haven't looked at the source code, but what he said is we can determine if > > an MBR is valid by checking the bootable flag, and this is not always so. > > If the bootable flag is neither 0 nor 0x80, then neither libparted nor > the Linux kernel will understand it as a DOS partition table. Is it > really all that helpful for GRUB to attempt to do so?
No. Sorry, I miss-read what you said before. See my other mail. -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
