[debbugs-tracker] bug#34430: closed (GNU Parted 3.2 – Disks' sizes calculation model may be incorrect)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Mon, 11 Feb 2019 10:38:58 -0800
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#34430: GNU Parted 3.2 – Disks' sizes calculation model 
may be incorrect
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #34430,
regarding GNU Parted 3.2 – Disks' sizes calculation model may be incorrect
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
34430: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=34430
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems

--- Begin Message --- Subject: GNU Parted 3.2 – Disks' sizes calculation model may be incorrect Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 11:53:36 +0100

Hi. Commands executed:

# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdc

# parted /dev/sdc
(parted) unit s print free
Error: /dev/sdc: unrecognised disk label
Model: (...) (scsi)  
Disk /dev/sdc: 15638480s
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: unknown
Disk Flags: 

(parted) mktable msdos 
(parted) unit s print free 
Disk /dev/sdc: 15638480s
Partition Table: msdos

Number  Start  End        Size       Type  File system  Flags
        2s     15638479s  15638478s        Free Space

Disks' sizes calculation model, involved in the calculation of values related to disks, appears to be incorrect. Here an illustration from above output, assuming that disks start from sector 1; according to that assumption correct calculation model regarding disks' sizes is expected to be:

Disk <path> = Size + (Start - 1<size_unit> = 15638478s + (2 -1)s = 15638479s.

However exhibited Disk /dev/sdc size is 15638480s. Regards R.T.

--- End Message ---

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#34430: GNU Parted 3.2 – Disks' sizes calculation model may be incorrect
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 11 Feb 2019 10:38:58 -0800
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
>
>
>
>
> Disks start at partition 0. But you can't use it because then you'd be
> overwriting the MBR.
>
> -- 
> Brian C. Lane (PST8PDT)
>
>
> --- End Message ---