Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 20 Nov 2000 18:03:27 +0800
From:      John Summerfield <summer@OS2.ami.com.au>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Dedicated disks (was: Dangerously Dedicated) 
Message-ID:  <200011201003.eAKA3RS01865@possum.os2.ami.com.au>
In-Reply-To: Message from Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>  of "Mon, 20 Nov 2000 19:20:44 %2B1030." <20001120192044.Q58333@echunga.lemis.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

grog@lemis.com said:
> On Sunday, 19 November 2000 at 23:57:25 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 02:53:04PM +1030, Greg Lehey wrote: >> >> If
> it shows valid partitions, you're using a Microsoft partition table.
>                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Greg, can you read English??  Can you comprehend it??  Are you bind
> and in
> a write-only mode??
> For the last time IT IS NOT A MICROSOFT PARTITION TABLE but a PC BIOS
> PARTITION TABLE AND DICTATED BY THE INTEL x86 PLATFORM.  THEY ARE ALSO
> REQUIRED BY THE IA-64 PLATFORM. >
> Why do you *insist* on calling it a "Microsoft partition table"??

> Hmm.  I was going to say "Because it was introduced with Microsoft
> 2.0", but I'm no longer so sure.  Reading the MS-DOS 2.11 source code,
> it seems that they didn't have a partition table at the time.  Can
> anybody remember when it was introduced? 

Nothing to do with the PC BIOS:
1. The PC did not support fixed disks (introduced with the XT). The PC 
understood floppy disks and cassette tape.
2. The BIOS has enough intelligence to read the first sector from a disk and 
then jmp into it. This sector is called the Master Boot Record, and it 
contains the original partition table and code with enough intelligence to 
find the active partition, read a teensy bit of it (using BIOS calls) and pass 
control to the code read in this manner.

If you want a dedicated BSD disk, you replace this code with equivalent code 
to find where BSD lives. Or Solaris.

In the original implementation of these partitions, one could have no more 
than four. Of these, only one could be active and so PCDOS/MSDOS didn't need 
code to navigate much partition table.

As to who concocted it, it was Microsoft and/or IBM.

What uses this format natively? All the DOS family down to Windows 2000|ME and 
OS/2. And Linux. And the CP/M family.

There is some dissension wrt extended partitions - MS keeps on introducing new 
codes for partition types.

Here are the partition types Linux fdisk recognises:

[root@emu /root]# fdisk
Using /dev/hda as default device!

Command (m for help): l

 0  Empty            c  Win95 FAT32 (LB 64  Novell Netware  a6  OpenBSD        
 1  DOS 12-bit FAT   e  Win95 FAT16 (LB 65  Novell Netware  a7  NEXTSTEP       
 2  XENIX root       f  Win95 Extended  75  PC/IX           b7  BSDI fs        
 3  XENIX usr       11  Hidden DOS FAT1 80  Old MINIX       b8  BSDI swap      
 4  DOS 16-bit <32M 14  Hidden DOS FAT1 81  Linux/MINIX     c7  Syrinx         
 5  Extended        16  Hidden DOS FAT1 82  Linux swap      db  CP/M           
 6  DOS 16-bit >=32 17  Hidden OS/2 HPF 83  Linux native    e1  DOS access     
 7  OS/2 HPFS       40  Venix 80286     85  Linux extended  e3  DOS R/O        
 8  AIX             41  PPC PReP Boot   93  Amoeba          eb  BeOS fs        
 9  AIX bootable    51  Novell?         94  Amoeba BBT      f2  DOS secondary  
 a  OS/2 Boot Manag 52  Microport       a5  BSD/386         ff  BBT            
 b  Win95 FAT32     63  GNU HURD       

Command (m for help):

How many are used natively, and how many under sufferance, I do not know.

Note: this table is not completely accurate: the OS/2 definition of 0x07 is 
"installable filesystem." It's usually HPFS, but need not be.





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200011201003.eAKA3RS01865>