Daniel J Blueman wrote: ... >> But let's back up a step. >> Do we really need to change anything? >> Or are you proposing (like I think Eric was) a way to >> make this merely more convenient? > > The question is: will the average user know and be prepared to do > this? Probably not, so will experience a performance/longevity penalty > which could have been avoided perhaps...
I sincerely hope that the average user does not use parted ;-) Even for those of us who have braved its murky depths, sometimes it's hard to remember (or discover) how to do things the parted way. >> I can already create partitions aligned to 128KiB boundaries. >> This creates a first partition of just less than 1GiB, >> and the second taking up the remainder of the space >> and also using a size that's a multiple of 128KiB: >> >> dev=file; : > $file >> k=1024 m=$(($k*$k)) g=$(($k*$k*$k)) >> dd if=/dev/null of=$dev bs=1 seek=32GiB >> parted -s $dev mklabel gpt >> parted -s $dev u B mkpart primary $((128*$k)) $(($g-1)) >> parted -s $dev u B mkpart primary $g $((32*$g - $m - 1)) >> parted -s $dev u B p >> >> Model: (file) >> Disk /t/file: 34359738368B >> Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B >> Partition Table: gpt >> >> Number Start End Size File system Name >> Flags >> 1 131072B 1073741823B 1073610752B primary >> 2 1073741824B 34358689791B 33284947968B primary >> >> >> Now, I think that this functionality >> (snap-to-user-specified-or-system-derived-alignment) belongs in gparted, >> and not in parted. > > Yes, if we propose to add an option to say "tick, I know I have an > SSD", but this adds more unnecessary user complexity, when the cost to > non-SSDs is so low. > > What's (at worst) 128KB slack in partition layouts, when we already > skip the first 63 sectors anyway? If that were the only cost, we'd switch right away. However, parted's code is very fragile, and changing how it handles constraints/alignment seems like it'd be very risky. Why go there if it's not absolutely necessary? Besides, the functionality I think you want (to make the process convenient or mandatory) belongs in a higher-level tool. If the programmers and tools invoking parted cannot be bothered to do a little modulo arithmetic and be aware of alignment, then they shouldn't be choosing partition boundaries in the first place. _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list parted-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel