[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] nested partitions

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nested partitions
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 02:50:02 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 01:13:11AM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Robert Millan<address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko 
> > wrote:
> >> On Robert's request I write about the usage cases I'm aware. It's by
> >> no means complete
> >>
> >> 1) bsdlabel on PC-style. By most *BSD flavours
> >> 2) sunpc on PC-style. By Solaris
> >> 3) Some kind on PC-style on PC-style by Minix. (not sure about this
> >> one -it was a long time ago)
> >> I vaguely heard of (I may be completely wrong):
> >> 4) amiga on PC-style by AROS
> >> 5) sun on apple. Polaris (?)
> >
> > Can someone confirm the third one?  It's the only one that breaks the
> > "contained label inside container label" pattern.
> 4 and 5 would break this pattern as well. Amiga and Sun are used
> standalone on corresponding systems.

None of them seem to be acting as container and containee at the same time.

For example, amiga can be a containee, but it's never a container for
anything (as far as we know).

In fact, we only know one label that is used as container, possibly two if #5

Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

reply via email to

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