From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Greaves Subject: Re: Proper partition type for components with V1.x superblocks? Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:24:21 +0100 Message-ID: <484FB5E5.8000207@dgreaves.com> References: <484F9A3E.7020709@rabbit.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <484F9A3E.7020709@rabbit.us> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Rabbitson Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Peter Rabbitson wrote: > Hello, > > The subject pretty much says it all - it obviously is not 0xFD, since > there is nothing to autodetect. Is there some best > practice/semi-standard way of marking a raid component partition as > such? After reading the specs 0xDA (non-fs data) comes to mind, but I > figured I'll ask here. I recently wondered if there should be a new partition type. Partitioning tools look for (and sometimes find!) filesystems on 0x83 partitions so 0x83 is out (anyone splitting a mirror should be happy changing the type back) I'd rather that rescue disk didn't think 'oh, I'll use that swap partition', so 0x82 is out. I don't want md trying to autodetect and complaining so, as you say, 0xfd is out. I think it would be nice to mark them as 0xFC David