[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 2.5 'what to expect'
    Andries Brouwer wrote:
    > > Definitely. I'm hoping that people will decide upon a userland that
    > > supports the popular (non-raid) partition tables as well as the simple
    > > raid partitions, too.
    > That reminds me.
    > Our DOS-type partition tables are close to their limit -
    > regularly people complain about things that do not work
    > with disks of size between 1 TB and 2 TB, and if not today
    > then very soon we'll see disks too large to handle with
    > DOS-type partition tables.
    > Two years ago or so I wrote some simple-minded stuff -
    > maybe there also was discussion on Linux-type partition tables,
    > I forgot all about it.
    > (Maybe the format was plan9-inspired, with sequence number,
    > start, size, label and uuid, all in ASCII.)
    > What is the situation today? What is the structure of these
    > LVM or raid partition tables? Is there some natural type
    > suitable for crossing the 2 TB limit?
    > Is it better to invent a Linux-type partition table?

    What are the limits of the "Windows Logical Disk Manager (LDM)"
    partition format? I've never used it myself, but it's there in
    fs/partitions and presumably there are people using it on modern PCs.

    -- Jamie
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [W:0.021 / U:81.828 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site