From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
To: Andrew Bradford <andrew@bradfordembedded.com>
Cc: OE Core mailing list <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: "parted" vs "sfdisk"
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 10:02:35 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1608051000330.17623@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160805130018.GD29547@kaim-eeyore.kodakalaris.net>
On Fri, 5 Aug 2016, Andrew Bradford wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On 08/05 06:19, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > your personal opinions, if you would -- i'm working on some scripts
> > to do automated installs on a target board, currently based on
> > parted, but parted seems a bit dense at times, and awkward, and i'm
> > thinking of switching to sfdisk.
> >
> > for people who have done this sort of thing, do you have any strong
> > opinions either way of parted versus sfdisk? i realize that's not much
> > to go on, just curious about personal preferences, and why.
>
> sfdisk has changed both its input format and command-line options in
> recent versions of util-linux. If you're scripting sfdisk, you need to
> be aware of this as some of the people who use your scripts will have
> varying versions of util-linux. For example, in my experience,
> util-linux 2.28 in Debian Stretch and util-linux 2.25.2 in Debian Jessie
> cannot have their sfdisk executables scripted in the same way and then
> produce the same set of partitions when setting up an SD card for an
> embedded system.
>
> The change in input format and command-line options happened around
> util-linux 2.26-2.27 but I haven't dug into it too much to find out
> exactly when.
>
> The newer input format for sfdisk is quite nice, imho, and easy to read.
> You can do something like this now:
>
> {
> echo "label: dos"
> echo "start=1MiB size=32MiB type=0x0C bootable"
> echo "start=33MiB"
> } | sfdisk ${DEVICE}
>
> While the older sfdisk input format would look something like:
>
> {
> echo 1,32,0x0C,*
> echo 33,,,-
> } | sfdisk ${DEVICE}
ah, now *that* i like ... of course, i'd probably use a here
document:
sfdisk ${DEVICE} <<-EOF
label: dos
start=1MiB size=32MiB type=0x0C bootable
start=33MiB"
EOF
pretty sure that would have the same effect, yes?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-05 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-05 10:19 "parted" vs "sfdisk" Robert P. J. Day
2016-08-05 10:28 ` Gary Thomas
2016-08-05 10:31 ` Robert P. J. Day
2016-08-05 13:00 ` Andrew Bradford
2016-08-05 14:02 ` Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2016-08-09 12:22 ` Mike Looijmans
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.20.1608051000330.17623@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rpjday@crashcourse.ca \
--cc=andrew@bradfordembedded.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox