Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 20:52:24 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey), tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), karsten@rohrbach.de (Karsten W. Rohrbach), andre@akademie3000.de (Andre Albsmeier), intmktg@CAM.ORG (Marc Tardif), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) Message-ID: <200010022052.NAA10099@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010012343530.5871-100000@besplex.bde.org> from "Bruce Evans" at Oct 01, 2000 11:59:06 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use > > it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find > > convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way > > that anybody can have any objection. > > Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. The PReP specification makes it crystal clear how you can support up to 2^32 sectors with the DOS partition table mechanism. It's perhaps the best documentation I've ever seen for the DOS partition table, and the 32 bit sector field. I'd have bought the thing for that documentation alone, had I known it was there when I needed it. PS: That's 112 TB, in LBA mode. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200010022052.NAA10099>