Re: libgparted bug.

On Monday 12 February 2018 17:29:58 David Wright wrote: > On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 15:32:50 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Monday 12 February 2018 13:44:04 Brian wrote: > > > On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 08:17:23 +0100, deloptes wrote: > > > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > >> TDE has support channels.

Re: libgparted bug.

On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 15:32:50 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 12 February 2018 13:44:04 Brian wrote: > > > On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 08:17:23 +0100, deloptes wrote: > > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > > >> TDE has support channels. People there are far more likely to be > > > >> familiar with

Re: libgparted bug.

On Monday 12 February 2018 16:29:43 deloptes wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > usbmount has been disabled.  That would I think, have fixed the > > original problem that started all this hoohaw. > > > > My apologies to the list in that case. > > With full respect, Gene, we are glad it worked for

Re: libgparted bug.

Gene Heskett wrote: > I, based on the previous post, scanned thru the trinity control center, > and found the automount unchecked, but mount as user is checked. That > seems like its handy, so I left it checked. Yes, indeed, I found it too automount is unchecked mount as user is checked +

Re: libgparted bug.

Gene Heskett wrote: > usbmount has been disabled.  That would I think, have fixed the original > problem that started all this hoohaw. > > My apologies to the list in that case. With full respect, Gene, we are glad it worked for you once again! regards

Re: libgparted bug.

On Monday 12 February 2018 15:16:47 Brian wrote: > On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 14:14:56 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > I have restored everything that I played with in the udev dept. And > > re-enabled usbmount in its config, exactly as installed originally. > > Mmm. > > > I have unmounted both visible

Re: libgparted bug.

On Monday 12 February 2018 14:00:42 deloptes wrote: > Brian wrote: > >> I don't know what you mean, but I read and post to both lists > >> (user/devel) > > > > January was a busy time on the list. > > I didn't have that impression if you mean TDE. It is a small community > (at least the posting

Re: libgparted bug.

On Monday 12 February 2018 13:44:04 Brian wrote: > On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 08:17:23 +0100, deloptes wrote: > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > >> TDE has support channels. People there are far more likely to be > > >> familiar with wheezy (unsupported on Debian) and their own > > >> packages (not in

Re: libgparted bug.

On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 14:14:56 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > I have restored everything that I played with in the udev dept. And > re-enabled usbmount in its config, exactly as installed originally. Mmm. > > I have unmounted both visible partitions of this sd card, and they have > not

Re: libgparted bug.

On Monday 12 February 2018 13:36:43 deloptes wrote: > Curt wrote: > > On 2018-02-11, Gene Heskett wrote: > >> On Sunday 11 February 2018 18:19:00 Brian wrote: > >>> On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 17:07:03 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > >>> > On Sunday 11 February 2018 15:31:13 Brian

Re: libgparted bug.

On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 20:00:42 +0100, deloptes wrote: > Brian wrote: > > >> I don't know what you mean, but I read and post to both lists > >> (user/devel) > > > > January was a busy time on the list. > > > I didn't have that impression if you mean TDE. It is a small community (at > least the

Re: libgparted bug.

On Monday 12 February 2018 02:17:23 deloptes wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > >> TDE has support channels. People there are far more likely to be > >> familiar with wheezy (unsupported on Debian) and their own packages > >> (not in Debian) and any automounting issues. > > there is no automount -

Re: libgparted bug.

Brian wrote: >> I don't know what you mean, but I read and post to both lists >> (user/devel) > > January was a busy time on the list. > I didn't have that impression if you mean TDE. It is a small community (at least the posting part of it). >> Unfortunately I upgraded long time ago from

Re: libgparted bug.

On Mon 12 Feb 2018 at 08:17:23 +0100, deloptes wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > >> TDE has support channels. People there are far more likely to be > >> familiar with wheezy (unsupported on Debian) and their own packages > >> (not in Debian) and any automounting issues. > > > > there is no

Re: libgparted bug.

Curt wrote: > On 2018-02-11, Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Sunday 11 February 2018 18:19:00 Brian wrote: >> >>> On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 17:07:03 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: >>> > On Sunday 11 February 2018 15:31:13 Brian wrote: >>> > > linuxcnc is an Xfce based system and that DE

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 17:07:03 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Sunday 11 February 2018 15:31:13 Brian wrote: > > On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 11:08:23 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Sunday 11 February 2018 10:19:16 David Wright wrote: > > > > […] Otherwise, look to your DE configuration. […] > >

Re: libgparted bug.

On 2018-02-11, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Sunday 11 February 2018 18:19:00 Brian wrote: > >> On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 17:07:03 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: >> > On Sunday 11 February 2018 15:31:13 Brian wrote: >> > > linuxcnc is an Xfce based system and that DE does the >> > >

Re: libgparted bug.

Gene Heskett wrote: >> TDE has support channels. People there are far more likely to be >> familiar with wheezy (unsupported on Debian) and their own packages >> (not in Debian) and any automounting issues. > there is no automount - Gene might remove usbmount package and see if this helps. The

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sunday 11 February 2018 18:19:00 Brian wrote: > On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 17:07:03 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Sunday 11 February 2018 15:31:13 Brian wrote: > > > linuxcnc is an Xfce based system and that DE does the > > > automounting. It is not usbmount or 60-persistent-storage.rules. > >

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 17:07:03 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Sunday 11 February 2018 15:31:13 Brian wrote: > > > linuxcnc is an Xfce based system and that DE does the automounting. It > > is not usbmount or 60-persistent-storage.rules. I'm fairly sure there > > is a way of turning it off but

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sunday 11 February 2018 15:31:13 Brian wrote: > On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 11:08:23 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Sunday 11 February 2018 10:19:16 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 00:01:26 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > I don't believe usbmount did this one, > > > >

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sunday 11 February 2018 12:35:54 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > The real problem is of coarse that there has not ever been 2 > > identical sd cards made, so a dd image to the end of the card A, > > will not ever install that image on another supposedly identical > >

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 11:08:23 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Sunday 11 February 2018 10:19:16 David Wright wrote: […] > > On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 00:01:26 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > I don't believe usbmount did this one, 60-persistent-storage.rule I > > > think did this one as I only

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 11:08:23 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Sunday 11 February 2018 10:19:16 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 00:01:26 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > I don't believe usbmount did this one, 60-persistent-storage.rule I > > > think did this one as I only kill

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: > The real problem is of coarse that there has not ever been 2 identical sd > cards made, so a dd image to the end of the card A, will not ever > install that image on another supposedly identical card B or C, they are > NOT the same size except in the salespersons

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sunday 11 February 2018 10:19:16 David Wright wrote: > On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 00:01:26 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 23:34:12 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 22:06:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 18:04:30 Brian

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sun 11 Feb 2018 at 00:01:26 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 10 February 2018 23:34:12 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 22:06:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 18:04:30 Brian wrote: > > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 16:09:00 -0500, Gene

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sunday 11 February 2018 06:23:35 deloptes wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > /etc/usbmount/usbmount.conf.  And it has exactly the switch I was > > looking for. So ATM its turned off. But damn! I just now plugged in > > the cell phone and the icon popped up in about a second. But I guess > >

Re: libgparted bug.

Gene Heskett wrote: > I don't believe usbmount did this one, 60-persistent-storage.rule I think > did this one as I only kill sdd, and the phone, if the card reader (sdd) > is plugged in would have made the phone be sdf. I don't think you need usbmount at all, but I am not at 100% sure for

Re: libgparted bug.

Gene Heskett wrote: > /etc/usbmount/usbmount.conf.  And it has exactly the switch I was looking > for. So ATM its turned off. But damn! I just now plugged in the cell > phone and the icon popped up in about a second. But I guess thats > because I didn't block it for sdf. > The icon itself is

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 23:34:12 David Wright wrote: > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 22:06:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 18:04:30 Brian wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 16:09:00 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 15:27:09 David Wright

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 22:06:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 10 February 2018 18:04:30 Brian wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 16:09:00 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 15:27:09 David Wright wrote: > > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 15:08:58 (-0500), Gene

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 18:04:30 Brian wrote: > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 16:09:00 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 15:27:09 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 15:08:58 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 11:57:38 David Wright

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 16:09:00 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 10 February 2018 15:27:09 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 15:08:58 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 11:57:38 David Wright wrote: > > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 09:10:40 (-0500),

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 15:27:09 David Wright wrote: > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 15:08:58 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Saturday 10 February 2018 11:57:38 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 09:10:40 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > And despite my emasculation of udev,

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 15:12:21 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > i proposed (poking with a long stick in the fog): > > > dd if=/dev/sdd bs=512 skip=16500703 count=66 \ > > > of=rock-img-shrunk.img seek=16500703 > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > Which was an instant return claiming 66 blocks

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 15:08:58 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 10 February 2018 11:57:38 David Wright wrote: > > > Package: usbmount > > > > Description-en: automatically mount and unmount USB mass storage > > devices > > > > This package automatically mounts USB mass storage devices

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 15:08:58 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 10 February 2018 11:57:38 David Wright wrote: > > > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 09:10:40 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > And despite my emasculation of udev, disabling sdd, according to the > > > syslog, usbmount is still auto

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, i proposed (poking with a long stick in the fog): > > dd if=/dev/sdd bs=512 skip=16500703 count=66 \ > > of=rock-img-shrunk.img seek=16500703 Gene Heskett wrote: > Which was an instant return claiming 66 blocks had been copied. Yeah. Fast. But sufficient only if i did not

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 11:57:38 David Wright wrote: > On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 09:10:40 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > And despite my emasculation of udev, disabling sdd, according to the > > syslog, usbmount is still auto mounting these cards, all 3 of them. > > So if I plan on working with

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 10:53:25 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > and again a miscalculation by differing block sizes. > > The adventurous proposal would be useless because working somewhere > in the still undamaged part of the image file. > skip= and seek= must be the numbers for blocks of

Re: libgparted bug.

On Sat 10 Feb 2018 at 09:10:40 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > And despite my emasculation of udev, disabling sdd, according to the > syslog, usbmount is still auto mounting these cards, all 3 of them. So > if I plan on working with these images on this machine with gparted, I > imagine I had

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, and again a miscalculation by differing block sizes. The adventurous proposal would be useless because working somewhere in the still undamaged part of the image file. skip= and seek= must be the numbers for blocks of 512 bytes rather than of 64 KiB. So this proposal should have been dd

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: > Warning! Secondary partition table overlaps the last partition by > 33 blocks! Sorry, my mistake. I should have staid with my first rough estimation of 8 GiB = 131072 * 64 KiB. Actually i missed the safe size by just one chunk of 64 KiB. 128913 would have been enough.

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 03:57:57 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > i wrote: > > > your count=122070 was too small. It should have been 128912. > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > the backup GPT table, if it exists, is actually at the end > > of the disk, after another 50Gb of of 's. But how do I

Re: libgparted bug.

On Saturday 10 February 2018 02:55:08 deloptes wrote: > David Wright wrote: > > Well, as I explained, I don't use a DE so I wouldn't have a clue. > > There presumably are people here who use TDE. I see it mentioned > > a lot. > > I use the 14.1 - DEV version, but also in previous one I have never

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, i wrote: > > your count=122070 was too small. It should have been 128912. Gene Heskett wrote: > the backup GPT table, if it exists, is actually at the end > of the disk, after another 50Gb of of 's. But how do I "fix" the > file? Partition editors suitable for GPT are supposed to be

Re: libgparted bug.

David Wright wrote: > Well, as I explained, I don't use a DE so I wouldn't have a clue. > There presumably are people here who use TDE. I see it mentioned > a lot. I use the 14.1 - DEV version, but also in previous one I have never experienced automounting. Could be that Gene installed automount

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 14:37:16 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > your count=122070 was too small. It should have been 128912. See > below. > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > gene@coyote:~/rock64.imgs$ /sbin/gdisk -l rock-img-shrunk.img > > [...] > > Caution: invalid backup GPT header, but valid main

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 14:28:15 Brian wrote: > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 10:52:08 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > > On Fri, 09 Feb 2018, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > I killed udev for /dev/sdd, gparted works now. But I really need a > > > quicker way than editing a udev rule. I wonder if I could make

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 14:11:27 Gene Heskett wrote: > On Friday 09 February 2018 13:56:35 David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 12:34:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Friday 09 February 2018 11:50:46 David Wright wrote: > > > > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 04:20:51 (-0500), Gene

Re: libgparted bug.

On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 14:11:27 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Friday 09 February 2018 13:56:35 David Wright wrote: > > > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 12:34:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Friday 09 February 2018 11:50:46 David Wright wrote: > > > > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 04:20:51 (-0500),

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, your count=122070 was too small. It should have been 128912. See below. Gene Heskett wrote: > gene@coyote:~/rock64.imgs$ /sbin/gdisk -l rock-img-shrunk.img > [...] > Caution: invalid backup GPT header, but valid main header; regenerating > backup header from main header. You cut off ~ 56

Re: libgparted bug.

On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 10:52:08 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Fri, 09 Feb 2018, Gene Heskett wrote: > > I killed udev for /dev/sdd, gparted works now. But I really need a > > quicker way than editing a udev rule. I wonder if I could make udev > > aware that gparted was running. > > udev

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 13:56:35 David Wright wrote: > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 12:34:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Friday 09 February 2018 11:50:46 David Wright wrote: > > > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 04:20:51 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > On Friday 09 February 2018 04:11:42 Thomas

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 13:13:42 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > When did fdisk learn about GPT part tables? > > Dunno. It recognizes GPT by type "ee" of the "Protective MBR" entry in > > the partition table of the MBR: > > Device Boot Start

Re: libgparted bug.

On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 12:34:05 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Friday 09 February 2018 11:50:46 David Wright wrote: > > > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 04:20:51 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Friday 09 February 2018 04:11:42 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Gene Heskett wrote: >

Re: libgparted bug.

On Fri, 09 Feb 2018, Gene Heskett wrote: > I killed udev for /dev/sdd, gparted works now. But I really need a > quicker way than editing a udev rule. I wonder if I could make udev > aware that gparted was running. udev doesn't automount by default;[1] it's likely just exposing the fact that a

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, correcting myself: > > /dev/sdd 1 32768 125042687625049607 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT > This is probably an unpartitioned "disk" with MS-Windows filesystem. The "1" probably is the partition number. I mistook it for the boot flag. So the stick is partitioned with one partition.

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: > When did fdisk learn about GPT part tables? Dunno. It recognizes GPT by type "ee" of the "Protective MBR" entry in the partition table of the MBR: > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > rock-img-shrunk.img 1 1

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 11:50:46 David Wright wrote: > On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 04:20:51 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Friday 09 February 2018 04:11:42 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > That is not the problem, something is automounting the partition >

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 11:01:38 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > > # skip rules for inappropriate block devices > > KERNEL=="fd*|mtd*|nbd*|gnbd*|btibm*|dm-*|md*|sdd", > > GOTO="persistent_storage_end" > > That's a neighbor of where i once stopped to experiment. > So now: > >

Re: libgparted bug.

On Fri 09 Feb 2018 at 04:20:51 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Friday 09 February 2018 04:11:42 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > > That is not the problem, something is automounting the partition as > > > soon as gparted unmounts the SOB, so by the time you start

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, > # skip rules for inappropriate block devices > KERNEL=="fd*|mtd*|nbd*|gnbd*|btibm*|dm-*|md*|sdd", > GOTO="persistent_storage_end" That's a neighbor of where i once stopped to experiment. So now: KERNEL=="fd*|mtd*|nbd*|gnbd*|btibm*|dm-*|md*|zram*|mmcblk[0-9]*rpmb|sr4",

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 05:17:35 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > > Got the sonofabitch, I added sdd to the ignore line > > in /lib/udev/rules.d/60-persistent-storage.rules. > > What exactly did you do ? > ("ignore line" does not give me insight when looking at the file.) > > > I wonder if I

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, > Got the sonofabitch, I added sdd to the ignore line > in /lib/udev/rules.d/60-persistent-storage.rules. What exactly did you do ? ("ignore line" does not give me insight when looking at the file.) > I wonder if I could make udev > aware that gparted was running. That would be ideal.

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 04:11:42 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > That is not the problem, something is automounting the partition as > > soon as gparted unmounts the SOB, so by the time you start the > > resize, its mounted again and gparted is locked out. > > If

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 03:52:05 Gene Heskett wrote: > On Friday 09 February 2018 03:05:23 deloptes wrote: > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > > Trying to make a backup image of a 64GB bootable sdcard. Th os say > > > its 59.b GB when it mounts the original, but pull copy to a file > > > and its

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: > That is not the problem, something is automounting the partition as soon > as gparted unmounts the SOB, so by the time you start the resize, its > mounted again and gparted is locked out. If explicit unmounting does not help, and if manual execution of the gparted

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 03:33:38 Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > Th os say its 59.b GB when it mounts the original > > [...] > > gene@coyote:~/rock64.imgs$ dd of=/dev/sdd bs=64k > > if=working-rock64.img dd: writing `/dev/sdd': No space left on > > device > > 976897+0

Re: libgparted bug.

On Friday 09 February 2018 03:05:23 deloptes wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > Trying to make a backup image of a 64GB bootable sdcard. Th os say > > its 59.b GB when it mounts the original, but pull copy to a file and > > its nearly a megabyte bigger than 64gigs.  So obviously the file is > >

Re: libgparted bug.

Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: > Th os say its 59.b GB when it mounts the original > [...] > gene@coyote:~/rock64.imgs$ dd of=/dev/sdd bs=64k if=working-rock64.img > dd: writing `/dev/sdd': No space left on device > 976897+0 records in > 976896+0 records out That's the usual confusion between ISO GB (=

Re: libgparted bug.

Gene Heskett wrote: > Trying to make a backup image of a 64GB bootable sdcard. Th os say its > 59.b GB when it mounts the original, but pull copy to a file and its > nearly a megabyte bigger than 64gigs.  So obviously the file is bigger > than a brand new unformatted disk. > Hi Gene, you should

libgparted bug.

Greetings all; Trying to make a backup image of a 64GB bootable sdcard. Th os say its 59.b GB when it mounts the original, but pull copy to a file and its nearly a megabyte bigger than 64gigs. So obviously the file is bigger than a brand new unformatted disk. dd said, when it ran out of room: