From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2003-08-13 15:50:42
|
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. > 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). Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li... In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds |