Just read this going throuhg 3 months of backed up parted mail. You make a very good point but I think going agains the spec is not the way to go. This would increase the possibility of incompatibilities with other UEFI spec implementations other than what parted has (which I'm not al all sure it complies 100% :)
For me, this is a big question mark ATM. Regards. On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:21:43AM +0100, Michael Renner wrote: > H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > Michael Renner wrote: > >> I propose to have libparted not clobber the BootCode area in the PMBR > >> when editing GPT labels. > >> > > > > Indeed! > > So... um... how are things run around here? Further discussion needed? > Do you need a patch? Do we need to invoke The Cabal? ;) > > As outlined in my Debian Bug report I'd be more than happy if we could > get this in Lenny (or at least bpo, if Lenny shouldn't be feasible), > since I already maintain a few servers were this ought to be a real > problem (tm). > > From what I've seen so far we'd need to read the old bootcode in > _write_pmbr in libparted/labels/gpt.c and stuff that into the pmbr we're > going to write, shouldn't be too complicated. > > My C is beyond rusty but I think I could come up with something if > necessary. > > best regards, > Michael > > _______________________________________________ > parted-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel -- Joel Andres Granados Brno, Czech Republic, Red Hat. _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
