From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.110.5]) by int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nBI2HFAs023924 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:17:15 -0500 Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com (e9.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.139]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nBI2H0Rj000392 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:17:00 -0500 Received: from d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (d01relay05.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.237]) by e9.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id nBI2AJnT024301 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:10:19 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id nBI2Gx60130700 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:16:59 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id nBI2GxKv014926 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:16:59 -0200 Received: from malahal.localdomain (malahal.beaverton.ibm.com [9.47.17.130]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id nBI2GxQG014910 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:16:59 -0200 Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:16:58 -0800 From: malahal@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Re: brainfart: lilo'd a PV Message-ID: <20091218021658.GA20200@us.ibm.com> References: <1261093282.21162.564.camel@pc.interlinx.bc.ca> <4B2AD174.40402@redhat.com> <1261101785.21162.712.camel@pc.interlinx.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1261101785.21162.712.camel@pc.interlinx.bc.ca> Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Brian J. Murrell [brian@interlinx.bc.ca] wrote: > On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 19:48 -0500, Takahiro Yasui wrote: > > > > Yes. The area begin with "LABELONE" is PV label, > > Looks like the LVM developers foresaw my brainfart and left the first > sector of the disk for me to bugger up without buggering up LVM. :-) Partition table uses the first sector (0th sector), so pretty much every other software that uses labels avoid the first sector. > > which is recorded in > > the first sector by default. > > Hrm. Do you really mean "first" there or second, which is sector 1 if > you start counting with 0? He really meant sector 1! You are just lucky!