From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:56439 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756375Ab2IZI4s (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Sep 2012 04:56:48 -0400 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.45]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E83F20897 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 04:56:47 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <1348649807.24014.140661132854813.0F43545F@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Francesco Turco To: util-linux@vger.kernel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain In-Reply-To: References: <1348605188.19630.140661132636721.0CD0D5D4@webmail.messagingengine.com> Subject: Re: Why fdisk wants the first partition to start at 1 MiB? Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 10:56:47 +0200 Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > It's a de-facto standard, which Windows does too. The first megabyte > is reserved here for a boot loader or any other management data that > could be needed for a disk or box to boot from. So as far as I understood both starting at 1 MiB and having partition boundaries at multiples of 1 MiB is for: - Dealing with all possible situations (Windows, bootloaders, 4K sectors, ...), both at present and in the foreseeable future - Avoiding each person to use different partitioning rules (as I were trying to do) Am I right?