From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <39682BD2.C34BE171@amulet.co.jp> Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 16:37:54 +0900 From: Hollis Blanchard MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Schmitz CC: yellowdog-devel@lists.yellowdoglinux.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: RFC: Changing default partition type for linux/ppc References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Michael Schmitz wrote: > > > > > Well, they don't at this point. For example in partitioning tool in > > LinuxPPC 2000, LinuxPPC Inc decided it would be better to use the type > > "Linux_PPC". This works (in that nothing gets overwritten, corrupted, > > etc) but has the disadvantage that no other software knows anything > > about that type. > > So can we get all distributions to agree on this partition type scheme? [snip] > LinuxPPC 1999 used the same type, and I think the 2000 change is a bad > thing. What are YellowDog and SuSE using? I agree. So far the Linux "standard" has been to pretend to be A/UX partitions. To my knowledge, every distribution with the exception of LinuxPPC 2000 uses Apple_UNIX_SVR2. (And I'm not sure that alteration was especially well thought out.) > Benh: are you maintaining the official version of pdisk now? That would be Eryk Vershen , who recently resurfaced in February (http://lists.linuxppc.org/listarcs/linuxppc-user/200002/msg01471.html). So now that the conversation's died down, it seems like everybody's happy with "Linux" (Mark Hatle's suggestion was for "Linux_*") and "Linux_swap". -Hollis ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/