Re: Parition Slices ( waqs Re: OFFTOPIC: New MBR and partitioning standard? )

Richard Gooch (rgooch@atnf.csiro.au)
Sun, 7 Mar 1999 10:46:01 +1100


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/