From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1GZ8IS-0008Kd-Aw for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:53:04 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GZ8IQ-0008Hu-TQ for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:53:02 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GZ8IP-0008EO-3u for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:53:02 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZ8IO-0008Dv-UB for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:53:00 -0400 Received: from [80.190.231.112] (helo=khepri.openbios.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1GZ8RK-0004Fb-2A for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 12:02:14 -0400 Received: from stepan by khepri.openbios.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GZ8IM-00044D-UB for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 17:52:58 +0200 Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 17:52:58 +0200 From: Stefan Reinauer To: The development of GRUB 2 Message-ID: <20061015155258.GA15209@coresystems.de> References: <200610151651.32868.okuji@enbug.org> <20061015153104.GA12994@coresystems.de> <45325591.6030909@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <45325591.6030909@gmail.com> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.18-rc5-1.5-default on an x86_64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Subject: Re: GRUB 1.95 is released X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 15:53:03 -0000 * Vladimir Serbinenko [061015 17:36]: > >Hm. What's the reason for being inconsistent here? > > > >If changing the partition naming scheme, I would have thought it'd > >become hd1,1. But why is the first disk 0 and the first partition 1? > > > >Using Linux style names might make sense as well... hda1,... > > It was already discussed plenty of times and the answer is that with > BIOS it's impossible to guess the linux's names, so it would just > confuse the users Sorry if I missed that. Counting disks from 0 and partitions from 1 will not confuse the users, because ...? ;-) You are right, using Linux conventions is hard to do, as this has a lot to do with how drivers are implemented and in which order they are executed. Note it was only a side thought of my mail, while the original intent, an inconsistent numbering scheme, is still an issue. -- coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br. Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613 Email: info@coresystems.de • http://www.coresystems.de/