From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 20:33:16 -0400 From: Tom Vier To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org, yellowdog-devel@lists.yellowdoglinux.com Subject: Re: RFC: Changing default partition type for linux/ppc Message-ID: <20000709203316.A12712@zero> References: <20000709172219.C12414@zero> <20000709213309.30020@192.168.1.10> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20000709213309.30020@192.168.1.10>; from bh40@calva.net on Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 11:33:09PM +0200 Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 11:33:09PM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > >i'd vote for "ext2", "hfs", etc. call them what they are, and keep it simple, > >instead of "Linux_Ext2fs" or something similar. > > That won't work for 2 reasons: > > - MacOS and MacOS X won't mount HFS partitions if the type is not Apple_HFS you're right. i was just giving examples of names and hfs popped into my head. > - If we put the fs type (like Linux_ext2) in the partition type, it's > not updated > by the various linux mkxxxx tools, and can be confusing. I would > rather keep > a simple "Linux" type, along with "Linux_swap" to help skipping swap > partition > in bootloaders (and installers) i'm not sure what you're saying. mkfs doesn't touch partition tables. i was thinking of partition types as more of a description of the fs, rather than naming them after the OS that uses them. on pcs, linux uses the same partition type for all file systems (except for swap). it wouldn't be a bad idea to do the same, as you seem to be saying. "Linux_swap" as a type does seem a little redundant to me, since the partition name can be set to "swap". on pc/dos style partitions they use a seperate type for for swap, but they also don't have a seperate name field. -- Tom Vier DSA Key id 0x27371A2C ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/