bug#20746: problem with non-LBA fat16

On 6/5/2015 1:36 PM, George Hicken wrote: Requested output prior to partitioning Error: /dev/sdb: unrecognised disk label Error: /dev/sdb: unrecognised disk label Error: /dev/sdb: unrecognised disk label Model: VMware Virtual disk (scsi) Disk /dev/sdb: 8590MB Sector size (logical/physical):

bug#20909: incorrect partition size calculation

On 6/29/2015 2:37 PM, Gena Makhomed wrote: You are off by 1. start and end are inclusive so the size of sda4 is: 1 + (7814037134 - 102764544) = 7711272591 Closing for this reason. BTW, start and end are inclusive - IMHO is very bad decision, because now it is not possible to partition disk

bug#21070: GPT backup corruption causes parted and linux installer to crash

On 7/15/2015 3:34 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > Hello, > > I have bought 2x2TB disks and set it up for RAID0. I have installed > Win7 first with UEFI that created GPT partitions. I want to install > FreeBSD and Linux on it.. > > Using Lubuntu AMD64 14.04.02 ISO and UEFI boot I have problem with >

bug#21272: partprobe does not wait for refresh of partition info

On 8/17/2015 11:58 AM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > udev is responsible for making sure the device nodes are correct. You > can't depend on them being present without checking for them first. A > udevadm settle after partprobe may also help. IIRC, libparted contacts udev to wait for the dev node to be

bug#21136: incorrect partition size calculation

On 7/26/2015 1:01 PM, Gena Makhomed wrote: > I am just tested again on parted version 3.1 > - it uses one more sector in case of "mib" unit. Ahh, the case matters.. very strange.

bug#21522: assertion metadata_length > 0 in add_logical_part_metadata failed

On 9/22/2015 5:15 PM, James Ring wrote: > Sorry, there's interleaving, attached the ebr file instead. Strange... I still get the same thing, but miss the last logical partition. I think I need the next sector following that last one for that.

bug#21522: assertion metadata_length > 0 in add_logical_part_metadata failed

On 9/22/2015 2:40 PM, James Ring wrote: > Attached mbr.bz2, thanks for taking a look. Same results, and I'm still waiting for an answer as to how you managed to print the table when the print command crashes.

bug#21522: assertion metadata_length > 0 in add_logical_part_metadata failed

On 9/22/2015 2:06 PM, James Ring wrote: > Hi Paul, It's Phill, not Paul ;) I'm still wondering how you got the partition table to print without getting this crash? Also when I try to reproduce it, I get an odd error from the mac partition table code about an invalid signature zero. I might

bug#21522: assertion metadata_length > 0 in add_logical_part_metadata failed

On 9/24/2015 11:56 AM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > Are you sure? According to > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_boot_record the EBR is at the > start of each logical partition, and chains to the next. I suppose it is > possible that would work since it has separate pointers for the > partition

bug#21522: assertion metadata_length > 0 in add_logical_part_metadata failed

On 9/24/2015 1:45 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > I've only seen 1 other bug like this in Fedora, and I basically told > them they need to recreate their disk or use some other tool. I'm not > sure we need to support such a corner case. Given that it doesn't look like this will be easy to fix and how

bug#21560: bug-parted Digest, Vol 154, Issue 8

On 9/25/2015 1:01 PM, Rod Smith wrote: > I've seen this type of layout before. I don't know of anything that will > create it if given the choice, but I'm pretty sure that sfdisk will > create such a layout if it's forced to do so. You might try using sfdisk > to create a series of logical

bug#21494: Assertion failure with confusion between Linux and driver descriptor

On 9/16/2015 2:47 AM, Shane Kerr wrote: > Anyway, I proceeded to try a new partition: > > --- > (parted) n n is for name, to name a partition. To create a new one you use mkpart. > Warning: The driver descriptor says the

bug#22180: Partition alignment using parted

On 12/23/2015 8:35 AM, Ankur Tank wrote: > Hi Phillip > > Thank you very much for reply, We are using am335x based (Beaglebone > Black) custom board with eMMC(4GB). I have couple more questions > regarding partition alignment. 1. Does partition alignment guarantee > performance improvement ? No;

bug#22497: parted math - Q2 and Q3 ?

On 1/30/2016 5:03 PM, Chris Johnson wrote: > It likely is the case that partition 1 does not nicely end with the last > sector of cylinder 121599 but instead has some sectors in cylinder > 121600 and furthermore that partition 9's starting sector is also in > cylinder 121600 ... > Is that what's

bug#22497: parted math - Q2 and Q3 ?

duplicate of #22387

bug#22386: Non-interactive mode and errors

On 1/16/2016 2:03 PM, Narcis Garcia wrote: > Is there any way to avoid this, and simple get the message error and status? Use script mode ( -s ).

bug#22579: Bug in add_logical_part_metadata()

On 2/7/2016 1:27 AM, Karsten Hens wrote: > Hello! > > Parted crashes with the following messages: Can you post the output of fdisk -l on this drive?

bug#22482: parted 2.3 assigns wrong GUIDs to GPT partitions

On 1/28/2016 11:51 AM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > 2.3 is pretty old, the GUID was changed in v3.2 to use the linux data > GUID.

bug#22387: Non-interactive use and errors

Asked and answered.

bug#24215: command=`rm`: how to script responses?

On 8/12/2016 7:21 PM, Tom Roche wrote: > $ sudo parted ${DRIVE_DEV} --script -- rm 1 >> Warning: Partition /dev/sdb1 is being used. Are you sure you want to >> continue? > > This seems wrong to me, in 2 ways: > > 1. The manual[2] says quite clearly >> ‘-s’ >> ‘--script’ >> never prompt the user

bug#24502: [PATCH] libparted: Show partition boundaries in sectors by default

On 9/21/2016 3:22 PM, John Pittman wrote: > In parted, by default, we print disk size and partition > boundaries in compact form. As partition boundaries fall > on sector boundaries, this is not useful for administration > and should be changed. This patch changes the default_unit No? People

bug#24502: [PATCH] libparted: Show partition boundaries in sectors by default

On 10/14/2016 10:25 AM, John Pittman wrote: > At initial creation people will still use whatever unit they care about, > whether it be GB, MB, or TB (or sectors). But they'll be specifying the > units by hand. > Likely not even using the print function until the end and possibly not at > all

bug#16134: [PATCH 1/2] libparted:tests: Move get_sector_size() to common.c

Patches need to stay on parted-devel only; the bug tracker mangles them.

bug#25103: partition alignment

On 12/4/2016 3:14 PM, Volta wrote: > On 4 December 2016 at 01:55, Josep Lladonosa wrote: >> Maybe this value is not drive related but usb bus related. Is that a usb >> drive? I guess so. Found similar cases. One of them: >> >>

bug#25006: Non-interactively extending a GPT disklabel to cover all disk

On 12/1/2016 5:08 AM, Yann Dirson wrote: > In fact, this issue and the "command parameters ignored when parted sees > need to fix GPT" I also reported work together in a surprising way: > > If the GPT needs to be extended, then

bug#26216: Bug in bug reporting system

On 3/22/2017 4:47 AM, Bjørn Forsman wrote: > Hi Parted developers, > > The "Reporting Bugs" page at > https://www.gnu.org/software/parted/bugs.shtml contains a "bug > reporting system" link[1] that, when followed, gives a python The web site has been updated and no longer refers to this broken

bug#26393: Found a bug

On 4/7/2017 5:30 AM, Joshua Nelson wrote: > Hello, sorry to bother you. > I ran into a bug in parted this morning when trying to label an > encrypted partition. Does parted support LUKS partitions? > Thanks for your time. > Details: > > version: 3.2 > error message: *Assertion (disk != NULL) at

bug#26464: Can not use mklabel filesystem specification feature

On 4/12/2017 6:43 AM, maze...@free.fr wrote: > I'm trying to use the possibility of mkpart to specify the file system type, > with the non interactive interface (--script) > > First point is pure documentary : > https://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/parted.html#mkpart indicates : > mkpart

bug#16134: [PATCH 3/3] libparted:tests: Enable _implemented_disk_label for atari

If the actual test fails when ss != 512, we probably shouldn't bother calling it in the first place. In other words, swap the order of get_sector_size() != 512 and the test, and change from != to ==. Also Sebastian had a point about the main partition table commit lacking a full message. Could

bug#25602: [parted] Problem with msdos mbr creation

On 2/1/2017 6:33 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > That's the MBR boot code normally used to boot a BIOS system. If it > causes problems on a non-x86 system you should zero it out (or write the > system bootloader after partitioning). Brian, do you know why parted adds the boot code but fdisk does not?

bug#25718: parted on Ubuntu16.04

On 2/13/2017 11:55 PM, Peter Bot wrote: > IN (parted) mklabel > OUT New disk label type? msdos > OUTError: Input/output error during read on /dev/sdh > Retry/Ignore/Cancel? Retry Looks like you have a flakey disk. > IN(parted) disk_toggle > OUT Error: /dev/sdh: unrecognised disk

bug#25198: bug: assertion (metadata_length > 0) failed

On 12/13/2016 6:09 PM, Rauno Viskus wrote: > As much as I found searching aroud mentioned about partitions needing at > least a sector in between eachother for metadata - is that it? Weird thing > is that everything worked before I removed my Windows partition from the > gap in between sda1 and

bug#25233: parted is confused by ISO images, miscalculates sizes/offsets

On 12/19/2016 7:19 AM, Bjørn Forsman wrote: > Hi all, > > [My name is Bjørn Forsman, end user of parted, I'm using parted as my > primary partitioning tool.] > > When I run parted (latest version, 3.2) on an ISO file, it gets > confused about the block size: > > $ parted

bug#25251: Bug in GNU Parted - mistakes MBR for a FAT32 partition

On 12/22/2016 5:08 PM, Sebastian Audet wrote: > I have a FAT32 partition on an MSDOS style disk (its actually an mSata > drive connected through USB for ultimate installation in another hardware > device that must read FAT32 - long story and tertiary to what I've found), > and through much

bug#25233: parted is confused by ISO images, miscalculates sizes/offsets

reopen 25233 retitle 25233 hybrid iso reports 4x disk size with 2k sectors thanks On 4/18/2017 12:08 PM, Bjørn Forsman wrote: > Ok. Maybe I was wrong about the parition table (don't know what I > expected). But the size of the image (5944MB) is wrong. The real file > is 1.5GB. That looks like an

bug#25134: bugs

On 12/7/2016 11:19 PM, Nor Azmeir Shamsudin wrote: > hi. i have this result when trying to use GNU Parted 3.2 > please help,Thanks! In the future, please just paste the log into the email instead of attaching it as a binary encoded file. Your disk simply has no partition table.

bug#25756: [systemd-devel] systemd mucking with partition tables ( was: bug#25756: Problems using "parted ... print" on nvme devices )

On 4/19/2017 12:17 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > This isn't precisely new functionality, it has been doing that since > years. It will synthesize "change" udev events when a process closes a block > device after writing, so that the changed superblock/partition > information is properly

bug#25756: systemd mucking with partition tables ( was: bug#25756: Problems using "parted ... print" on nvme devices )

On 2/16/2017 12:32 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > I think the tricky part of that is going to be that when we open the > device we don't really know what commands are going to be issued so it > needs to be RDWR to allow for all the other possibilities. I'm sure I have seen a patch floating around

bug#25813: parted should tell which partition is misaligned

retitle 25813 Alignment check should not be done to the end of the partition thanks On 2/20/2017 10:50 AM, Harald Dunkel wrote: > Hi folks, > > parted 3.2-17 (Debian Unstable) doesn't tell which partition > is misaligned. Sample session: > (parted) mkpart export 671088640s -2049s > Warning: The

bug#24915: alignment not working

On 11/9/2016 7:02 PM, Sobel-Sorenson, Chandler - (scar) wrote: > I'm trying to make a new partition but the alignment isn't working. I've > started parted with: parted -a optimal /dev/sda. Then: > > (parted) mkpart > Partition name?

bug#24930: Parted fails after reordering of partitions with fdisk

On 11/12/2016 4:55 AM, Hans Peter Würmli wrote: > > My system is Debian testing and kernel version "Linux version 4.7.0-1- > amd64 (debian-ker...@lists.debian.org) (gcc version 5.4.1 20160904 > (Debian 5.4.1-2) ) #1 SMP Debian 4.7.8-1 (2016-10-19)". > > GNU Parted has version 3.2. > > I

bug#27562: Resizepart command failes: "Unable to satisfy all constraints on the partition"

On 7/3/2017 1:42 AM, zwpwjwtz wrote: > I'm trying to expand one logical partition (/dev/sdb8) on my hard disk, and > parted aborted with the "resizepart" command: You are trying to extend the partition right up to the start of the next one, which does not leave a sector in between them for the

bug#26954: partprobe erases partition table on ramdisk

This was fixed recently by commit 21131f62.

bug#27013: parted 3.2 (on KNOPPIX) failure with smashing & segfault

On 5/21/2017 5:14 PM, David T-G wrote: > I may unplug this [USB-adapter-hung] drive and try it on a laptop that I > can repeatedly reboot; I'll follow up in that case. And I'm not > subscribed to the list and would appreciate being copied on replies so > that I know what I'm supposed to do next

bug#27884: parted reports the partition is not optimally aligned, even though it's 1MiB-aligned

On 9/20/2017 9:57 AM, Alicia Boya García wrote: > Indeed. > > This drive was advertising a ridiculous optimal_io_size that is not even > a power of two (2^16-1 512-byte sectors). Unfortunately this seems to be > the case with more Seagate drives: > >

bug#28099: Bag

On 8/15/2017 12:01 PM, Лукин Вячеслав wrote: > Hi. > > Help me please. > > Unable to determine the size of > /vmfs/volumes/5992d201-29107736-5b59-0025b5000100 (Inappropriate ioctl for > device). You will have to provide a lot more information than that. What kind of device is that? I've

bug#28521: GNU Parted.

On 9/19/2017 8:59 PM, Adam wrote: > message: Assertion (metadata_length > 0) at > ../../../libparted/labels/dos.c:2313 in function > add_logical_part_metadata() failed. This indicates that you have a logical dos partition that immediately follows a previous one, with no gap between for the EBR.

bug#27884: parted reports the partition is not optimally aligned, even though it's 1MiB-aligned

On 7/30/2017 6:46 PM, Alicia Boya García wrote: > Hi. > > Is there any explanation to this GNU parted output? > > GNU Parted 3.2 > Using /dev/sde > Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. > (parted) unit B >

bug#29084: parted mklabel

This is a bug tracker, and you appear to be asking a question so I am closing this bug report. In addition your question is entirely too vague to be answerable: you have not indicated what it is you want to accomplish. It could be recover the partitions you lost when you inadvertently ran

bug#28919: bug report v3.2 Assertion (max_size > 0) at ../../libparted/cs/constraint.c:71 in function ped_constraint_init() failed.

On 10/20/2017 5:05 PM, Rootless wrote: > Assertion (max_size > 0) at ../../libparted/cs/constraint.c:71 in function > ped_constraint_init() failed. Is this disk also partitioned using GPT? Can you dd and compress the first 64 sectors and post that so I can try to reproduce it? signature.asc

bug#29051: Error in `parted': realloc(): invalid next size

On 10/28/2017 11:35 PM, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > On the Samsung Galaxy TabPro S tablet, "parted /dev/sda print" crashes > with an error such as: > > *** Error in `parted': realloc(): invalid next size: 0x55cf7d3f3200 *** Can you run dd if=/dev/sda of=dump count=64, then gzip dump, and post

bug#28919: bug report v3.2 Assertion (max_size > 0) at ../../libparted/cs/constraint.c:71 in function ped_constraint_init() failed.

On 11/3/2017 9:23 AM, Rootless wrote: > It is GPT partitioned. I was able to succeed doing it differently. > I'm home sick, but can get you those first 64 sectors if they are > still useful. Only if you are still getting the error. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

bug#29216: Bug Report

On 11/8/2017 4:37 AM, Roy Dyton wrote: > message: Assertion (metadata_length > 0) at > ../../../libparted/labels/dos.c:2313 in function > add_logical_part_metadata() failed. > Aborted > redboy@RedBoy-Satellite-L350:~$ Please provide the output of parted /dev/sda u s print ( or whichever block

bug#29436: SEGV_MAPERR with disk_set

On 11/25/2017 6:53 AM, Grady Martin wrote: > Hello.  I am here to follow orders. > > ■ LANG=en_US.utf8 sudo parted /dev/sde > GNU Parted 3.2 > Error: /dev/sde: unrecognised disk label > You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do: > ... > Command History: > disk_set pmbr_boot on >

bug#28919: bug report v3.2 Assertion (max_size > 0) at ../../libparted/cs/constraint.c:71 in function ped_constraint_init() failed.

On 11/6/2017 9:16 AM, Rootless wrote: > Didn't try it again the same way and was successful. The volume has data on > it now, so no problems here. Then I'm closing the report. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

bug#29564: Segmentation fault if print command is issued

On 12/4/2017 6:49 AM, Nils Bars wrote: > Hello, > > I found a bug while fuzzing parted. A test case that triggers the > segmentation fault is attached. > > Is there any way for me to track the issue status on some sort of bug > tracker? You can view the bug status in a web page at

bug#29564: Segmentation fault if print command is issued

On 12/8/2017 11:18 AM, Håkon Løvdal wrote: > On 8 December 2017 at 15:17, Phil Susi <ps...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >> On 12/4/2017 6:49 AM, Nils Bars wrote: >>> - Trigger the bug >>> parted 'f01:id:02,sig:11,src:000220,op:arith8,pos:2568,val:-33' print >>

bug#29051: Error in `parted': realloc(): invalid next size

On 11/17/2017 4:13 AM, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > Here it is, in base64 format: Thanks. It appears that you have some non printing characters in your partition names. parted/table.c was using wcswidth() to check the width of the name in characters, but this function returns -1 if there are non

bug#29641: libparted-3.2: bug: The information sector has the wrong signature (0).

On 12/10/2017 4:50 AM, Andreas Abel wrote: > Hello parted team, > > gparted has asked me to send a bug report.  I attach a screen shot and > also here is the console output. Exactly what version of libparted were you using, and where was it obtained from? I believe there were some fatfs bugs

bug#31101: unit chs print...here it is

I don't see a problem there. On 4/8/2018 11:54 AM, Go Getter wrote: > Model: Unknown (unknown) > Disk /dev/sda1: 364,152,43 > Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B > BIOS cylinder,head,sector geometry: 364,255,63. Each cylinder is 8225kB. > Partition Table: loop > Disk Flags: > > Number

bug#31106: Inaccuracy in GNU parted documentation online manual

The msdos partition table does not support names; use gpt for that. On 4/9/2018 12:03 AM, Will Haley wrote: > https://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/parted.html says, regarding > `mkpart`, that a name can be specified as an argument to `mkpart`. > >

bug#31116: Bug on parted with OpenMediaVault (Debian) latest version

Can you provide the output of fdisk -l for this drive? On 4/9/2018 12:54 PM, Hugo Haldi wrote: > Command History: > list > print > print devices > sel sdf > sel /dev/sdf > > Error: FPE_INTDIV (Integer: divide by zero)Abandon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

bug#31111: Partition table wrongly identified as "atari"

On 4/10/2018 7:59 AM, bouke_1 wrote: > I quickly looked through the atari_probe routine in the Atari patch > code, and I may have found the logic error. At the bottom: > > } /* no XGM so try ICD */ > + else if (atr_part_valid (_part[0], rs_hd_size) > +  &&

bug#31100: bug idk the sys said so.

It seems that when no flags are supported, set and disk_set pass null for the filter, which makes the prompt accept any string as valid input. That fails to look up a flag bit, then tries to throw an exception naming the flag, but the flag name is null, so it bugs. Thanks for reporting this, it

bug#31111: Partition table wrongly identified as "atari"

On 5/10/2018 1:53 PM, Phil Susi wrote: > I'd say so. I can't reproduce the problem though by simply creating an > image file and making the partitions as you describe. Can you send your > whole MBR so I can try to reproduce it and see if fixing this logic > error fixes it? Ok, a

bug#30440: parted error

On 2/14/2018 3:31 PM, Chris Hartt wrote: > sudo dd if=/dev/sde count=1 | hd > > 1+0 records in > 1+0 records out > 512 bytes copied, 0.000549976 s, 931 kB/s >   00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > || > * > 0200 Weird... but parted /dev/sde print

bug#30440: parted error

On 2/14/2018 3:57 PM, Chris Hartt wrote: > i had previously gone into parted and then used the select device > command from there and the crash happened. when i tried the "(sudo) > parted /dev/sde print" string it worked properly. i then started parted > and tried to select sde and found it was

bug#30440: parted error

On 2/14/2018 3:22 PM, Chris Hartt wrote: > no partition table. i've not used parted before and wanted to only do > the non-destructive things that were available, like print and select > device and help. i've got another disc (sdh) with no partition table in > the same machine and it can be

bug#30440: parted error

On 2/14/2018 2:36 PM, Chris Hartt wrote: > chris@bas2:~$ sudo fdisk -l /dev/sde > > Disk /dev/sde: 7.3 TiB, 8001563222016 bytes, 15628053168 sectors > Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes > Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes > I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096

bug#29895: Parted 3.2 accessing /dev/mmcblk0rpmb considered a bug?

On 12/29/2017 9:00 AM, Ceriel Jacobs wrote: > eMMC spec 4.5 has a tiny (2MiB or 4MiB) Replay Protected Memory Block. > As well as UFS and NVMe have support for RPMB. This came to my attention a while back elsewhere.. probably the debian bug tracker. The question is how to identify such a device

bug#30440: parted error

On 2/12/2018 5:55 PM, Chris Hartt wrote: > parted 3.2 error message 2/12/18 Ubuntu 16.04 > > Assertion (max_size > 0) at ../../libparted/cs/constraint.c:71 in > function ped_constraint_init() failed. Can you provide the output of fdisk -l on this disk?

bug#29937: You found a bug in GNU Parted! Don't panic!

On 1/2/2018 12:27 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > This indicates that whatever created your partition layout didn't leave > enough metadata space for the extended partition. There is nothing we > can do for this. We *can* locate the EBR elsewhere like most other utilities do. I just haven't gotten