Re: 2.4.11 loses sda9

[Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl]

On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 12:08:14AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:

> You probably need to go into fdisk and change the partition type of
> sda9 from "0" to "83" (or any other non-zero type).  There is a
> reason that it is saying "omitting empty partition (9)" at boot,
> and "fdisk -l" doesn't list it - because type "0" means "I don't exist".

If I am not mistaken, it is fdisk rather than the kernel that says
"omitting empty partition (9)". (And the latest fdisk no longer
deletes partitions of type 0 from its listings.)
The sys_type field never had any significance to the kernel.

Andries


[By the way, it is a sad sight to see patch-2.4.11.
Where my own sources use  dev->hardsect_size , and
intermediate sources use  get_hardsect_size(dev)
an inline function defined roughly either as
        dev->hardsect_size
or as
        hardsect_size[MAJOR(dev)][MINOR(dev)]
so as to make it easy to switch between compiles where
a kdev_t is a number and we use the infamous arrays,
and compiles where a kdev_t is a pointer to a device struct,
and no arrays exist, I now see that get_hardsect_size(dev)
is replaced by
        get_hardsect_size(to_kdev_t(bdev->bd_dev))
. Yecch.
Al, I never understood why you want to introduce a
struct block_device * to do precisely what kdev_t
was designed to do.]