Re: Hello everyone ...

[Sven L. <sve...@wa...>]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 05:34:35PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 05:24:37PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 05:16:39PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 05:09:15PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > > >     hda1 (DH0)         2-  18 (  8 Meg)     muF\53 (0x6d754653), bootable pri 2
> > > > > > >     hda2 (DH1)        19- 526 (250 Meg)     muF\53 (0x6d754653)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > What are those ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > AmigaOS FFS International for MultiUser. The first one is System3.1:, the
> > > > > second one is App:.
> > > > 
> > > > Do you perchance have any documentation on this file system and how to
> > > > detect it ?
> > > 
> > > It's 99% backwards compatible with AFFS.
> > > 
> > > However, if a user has reformatted his partition using muFS, the ID in the
> > > bootblock won't be DOSx, but muFx (x = \0..\5) or muFS. AFFS in Linux knows
> > > about this.
> > 
> > So the position of the boot and root block are the same, as well as the
> > root block eyecatcher (type is 2, subtype is 1).
> 
> Yes, it's almost the same as AFFS.

Ok.

> > I think the problem comes from ufs not being m68k clean, maybe if it did
> > know about muFS it would be able to detect it and not crash on the ufs
> > problem. 
> 
> I don't have muFS on the second disk, and there it still crashes.
> 
> > That said, libparted doesn't seem to be really all that ready to handle
> > multiple filesystem variants.
> 
> I have only one file system type on the second disk.
> 
> BTW, removing the (un)register calls for UFS didn't help, as expected (the
> assertion just causes UFS not being registered).

What about removing the affs stuff ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther