Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Mar 1999 10:46:01 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: Parition Slices ( waqs Re: OFFTOPIC: New MBR and partitioning standard? ) |
| |
Adam Sulmicki writes: > > Thanks for info. > > I'm kind of confused though. I though it already was in one of the > 2.1.x kernels? > > "Edward S. Marshall" writes: > ->On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Adam Sulmicki wrote: > ->> That reminds me. Now that Linux supports more and more parition schemes, > ->> I think it is time to "upgrade" the way linux deals with "sub-paritions". > -> > ->Already done. See Richard Gooch's work on 'devfs', which adopted a naming > ->scheme much like you're suggesting
Last I heard, Linus was still thinking about devfs and was leaning slightly towards it. But that was sometime last year. I've not heard from him since.
> I did took there a brief look, and I see something like: > > | /dev/hda /dev/ide/hd/c0b0t0u0 > | /dev/hdb /dev/ide/hd/c0b0t1u0 > > But I still don't see how does it make sure that it does the "Right Thing" > and that the /dev/hdaX won't get renamed to some other id when there > appears a new parition/slice.
The intent with devfs is to append "s#" for BSD slice numbers to solve this problem. The normal (primary&extended) partitions use "p#" (with the existing partition number scheme). So in the end, you could have "c#b#t#u#p#s#".
I've not got BSD slices on my system, so I don't know what actually happens: it's been a long time since I looked at that part of the code.
Regards,
Richard....
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |