bug-parted
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: several changes for doc/USER in parted-1.4.9-pre1


From: clausen
Subject: Re: several changes for doc/USER in parted-1.4.9-pre1
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 09:42:19 -0200

OKUJI Yoshinori wrote:
> 
> I attach a patch for doc/USER in parted-1.4.9-pre1. The changes are
> what I found when translating it into Japanese. Most of them are
> cosmetic, but some are important. I explain why I changed only about
> what I don't think are cosmetic.
> 
> -      Copyright (C) 1999-2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> +      Copyright (C) 1999, 2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> Because "Information For Mainatainers of GNU Software" says that you
> shouldn't use a range.

Interesting.  Thanks.  But, for many things, it will be
1998, 1999, 2000, 2001.  This will get very long...?

> -  * Linux >= 2.2.x (Alpha, x86 PCs, PC98 and Macintosh PowerPC)
> +  * Linux >= 2.2.x (Alpha, x86 PCs, PC98, Macintosh PowerPC and Sun)
> 
> Sun is now supported, isn't it?

Yes.  Not tested enough though...  thanks

> -loader (i.e.  re-running the boot-load installer program, which usually
> -involves issuing a single command at the shell)  Not all boot loaders require
> -this.
> +loader (i.e.  re-running the installer program for the boot loader, which
> +usually involves issuing a single command at the shell).  Not all boot 
> loaders
> +require this.
> 
> I don't think your wording is common.

ok :-)
 
>  GRUB is a relatively new boot loader, for x86.  Depending on how GRUB is
> -installed, it may understand the filesystem, or simply remember where the 
> boot
> -files are stored.  It understands the filesystem if it's using "Stage1.5".  
> If
> -it's not using Stage1.5, then you need to reinstall Stage2 (please see the 
> GRUB
> -documentation).  Otherwise, you don't need to do anything.
> +installed, it may understand the file system, or simply remember where the 
> boot
> +files are stored.  It understands the file system if it's using "Stage 1.5".
> +If it's not using Stage 1.5 or the partition number changes, then you need to
> +reinstall Stage 2 (please see the GRUB documentation).  Otherwise, you don't
> +need to do anything.
>         GRUB automatically detects if LBA is available, and will use it if
> -necessary (equivalent to LILO's "lba32" option).
> +available (equivalent to LILO's "lba32" option).
> 
> Because Stage 1.5 remembers the number of the partition in which Stage
> 2 resides, it is necessary to reinstall GRUB, if the user changes the
> minor number. So I added information on this. And, GRUB uses LBA, if
> available but not if necessary, so I changed the sentense. FYI, all
> boot loaders which I know use LBA if necessary are NetBSD's and
> OpenBSD's. The same thing may be applied to FreeBSD's, but I'm not sure.

Thanks.  Does anyone know enough to write about their boot loaders?

> -       FreeBSD commonly uses a partition slice system, that isn't supported
> -by Parted (yet).
> +       FreeBSD commonly uses a partition slice system, that is supported
> +with bsd disk label in Parted. If you create a new disk label for FreeBSD,
> +you should use:
> +
> +       (parted) mklabel bsd
> 
> Parted now supports bsd disk labels, doesn't it?

No, this is something different.  (This difference should be
highlighted,
thanks!)

The partition slice system is an "extension" to the msdos partition
table.

> Another thing: for now, the boot disk image is named "partboot.img",
> but I think it would be better to rename it "partboot.pc.img" or
> similar, so someone can put boot images for other
> architectures. Personally, I wish that someone could make an image for
> UltraSparc... :)

Yeah, true.  That said, I think maintaining the boot disk images
properly is WAY to much work for me.  I'm waiting for a group of
people (yes, it's too much for 1 person!) to maintain a cross-platform
bootdisk distribution, that I can automatically generate boot disks
for.  Also, there are other issues, like needing "driver" disks, etc.

This isn't something I want to tackle on my own.  I provide the crappy
x86 boot floppies, because me current scripts are quick, and it is good
enough for 90% of people. It would be nice to have something better, but
we need volunteers...

Thanks,
Andrew Clausen



reply via email to

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