From owner-freebsd-current Thu Nov 28 14:22:16 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEDAD37B401 for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2002 14:22:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D408B43EBE for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2002 14:22:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gASMLros003476; Thu, 28 Nov 2002 23:22:06 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Riccardo Torrini Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Trivial patch: fdisk doesn't recognize my partitions In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 28 Nov 2002 23:00:29 +0100." Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 23:21:53 +0100 Message-ID: <3475.1038522113@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message , Riccardo Torrini write s: >I have 4 primary partitions and I use a boot manager (magic.com) >that install some black magic that hide unused partition, this >permit to have multiple 'other-OS' partition that don't know of >each other (but, obviously, FreeBSD can see and mount all of them). > >As far as I know it use an EXOR 0x10 to hide/unhide but fdisk doesn't >recognize 0x0B/0x0C fat32 when hidden (0x1B/0x1C) > >This is the patch, that can be extended easily to cover the range >0x1A-0x1F (0x0A-0x0F when hidden). I simply copied strings from >0x0B/0x0C and added Hidden in front of them :-) Any comment? >(I don't know if 0x1B/0x1C are registered as used) I think this is very marginal use really... If we really wanted to support this convention, we should not add (almost-duplicate) entries in the table, but rather on missing an entry in the table, try again after xor'ing with the "hide-bit" and see if we then get a hit. But as I said, this is rather marginal and I really don't feel it should go in unless this xor-0x10 convention is more widespread. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message