[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: parted's cp command for FAT32, and LBA/CHS/NTLDR missing woes

From: Szakacsits Szabolcs
Subject: Re: parted's cp command for FAT32, and LBA/CHS/NTLDR missing woes
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 11:07:42 +0200 (MEST)

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 10:11:11AM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 04:35:21AM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > > > Irrelevant. Bootloaders, mini-drivers are free to ignore LBA flag for
> > > > whatever many reasons.
> > > 
> > > The Microsoft FAT bootloaders respect the LBA flag, however.  At least,
> > > all the versions I have reverse engineered do, and I haven't seen
> > > any evidence to the contrary.
> > 
> > If you can't reproduce then google or read the reports people write about
> > recovering from boot problems using FAT32 with LBA flag set when they use
> > 
> >       sfdisk -d device | sfdisk --no-reread -H{255,240,etc} device
> > 
> > The above command only changes the CHS. If you were right then the above
> > wouldn't work.
> I couldn't find any instances with Google where (after about 10 min of 
> trying).
> In particular, none of the matches for this query are relevant:
>       "fat32 (lba)" -ntfs -yast -suse xp "dual boot" problem

When you filter out and restrict words, you exclude real hits at the same
time (in short, you tuned your search until you got what you wanted to
get). Examples: "this happened with me too having NTFS", "I resized FAT32
LBA on suse", "Friend had the same problem with suse", "same problem with
FAT32 lba on W2k", etc.

Ok, here is one, once more time (pointed it to you about 4-5 times so
far). You can find several examples there


See the 2nd comment. Parted changed the head to 16 and Win can't boot
anymore from XP FAT32 LBA.
> > > The NTFS ones don't always.
> > 
> > The issue is filesystem independent.
> Well, the boot loaders certainly aren't filesystem independent.  

I talk about the bootability issue, not only bootloaders. Bootloaders are
only part of the boot process that causes bootability problems.

> The Microsoft's fat16/fat32 boot loaders I've looked at support both
> CHS and LBA in a single image.  It's possible that the OEM option to
> disable LBA change the boot loader to a different one, however.

I've never talked about the Microsoft bootloaders. Booting is a wider and
more complex issue than just caring about Microsoft bootloaders. 


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]