From: David Neary (nearyd at domain khumbu.eeng.dcu.ie)
Date: Fri 04 Feb 2000 - 12:50:41 GMT
AFAIK (and I'm (always) open to correction), the extended partition
doesn't have to be the fourth. Basically there's space at the end of the
first sector for four partitions in the partition table, and as long as
you have one (bootable) primary partition, you're grand. In fact, IIRC,
RedHat's partitioning tool only creates one primary partition, and sets
everything else up as an extended partition (so /dev/hda2 is extended,
/dev/hda5 (first non-primary partition) is ext2 or whatever, and so on.
The extended partitions work a little like a linked list. The main
partition table tells the 'puter where to find the first extended
partition, and then in that "extended partition table" there's info on the
size of the partition, and where to find the next extended partition, etc.
At least, this is how I believe it works. If it didn't then I would have
had to have one of hdc5-8 as an extended partition to add hdc9.
In any case, I dson't think that would have a major effect on me being
unable to set up an ext2 partition in /dev/hdc2. But it's interesting, all
the same :)
Thanks for the reply,
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Jeff Rose wrote:
> I guess I am getting real rusty on this! I was curious why you didn't
> have /dev/hdc4 as EXTENDED, and /dev/hdc3 a normal ext2 (83) partition?
> I thought the 4th-level was the EXTENDED marker:
> ... as I notice you did with /dev/hdc5-8, hdc8 is a a '4th' (not
> EXTENDED as hdc3).
> Ready to learn again,
> ( >- Jeff Rose - everyone's Linux User Group (eLUG) -< )
> /~\ http://www.elug.org mailto:jrose at domain elug.org /~\
> | \) *** Freelance Linux/IT Writer *** (/ |
> |_|_ eFAX: +1.630.604.4130 _|_|
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:05:21 GMT