On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 02:55:07PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Joel Granados Moreno wrote:
> > A 64K cluster size (128 sectors) for FAT16 is not common but is possible.
> > Allow the use of 128 sector clusters instead of outputting an error.
> > ---
> > libparted/fs/fat/calc.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/libparted/fs/fat/calc.c b/libparted/fs/fat/calc.c
> > index 026aec8..327ae67 100644
> > --- a/libparted/fs/fat/calc.c
> > +++ b/libparted/fs/fat/calc.c
> > @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ PedSector
> > fat_max_cluster_size (FatType fat_type) {
> > switch (fat_type) {
> > case FAT_TYPE_FAT12: return 1; /* dunno... who cares? */
> > - case FAT_TYPE_FAT16: return 32768/512;
> > + case FAT_TYPE_FAT16: return 65536/512;
> > case FAT_TYPE_FAT32: return 65536/512;
> > }
> > return 0;
>
> Is there a test case to exercise this?
> Or a bug report?
look at
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/parted-devel/2009-June/002882.html
There is the bug report and there is the reason why I chose not to do a
test for it. If you know of any way to avoid the situation described in
the link, please share it with me :)
Regards.
--
Joel Andres Granados
Brno, Czech Republic, Red Hat.
_______________________________________________
parted-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
