From: Jim Brain (brain_at_jbrain.com)
Date: 2007-12-28 01:43:13
email@example.com wrote: > > > > P.S. A different subject - I don't know why but it seems to me that > nobody likes the idea of (re)using IDE64 partition scheme and > filesystem.. I wonder why..? We are defitely using the IDE64 Partition Scheme, as it uses the std IBM IDE partition scheme. If we implement the IDE64 FS, we should absolutely use partition type 0xcf (the one they use). Note, though, there might be issues using 0xcf for other FS-types. For one, IDE64 will no doubt assume an 0xcf partition type is IDEDOS FS, but if we overload that partition type with other FS layouts (like Linux uses 0x83 for multiple FStypes - xiafs, ext2, ext3, reiserfs, etc.), and someone tries to share a CF or IDE drive between the two adapters, major issues and data lossage will occur. The other issue (not nearly as problematic, but still) is that 0xcf is already a claimed partition type (0xcf is claimed by DR-DOS Secure FAT FS). As far as I can tell, 0xf8 is not used by anyone. As for the FS, I think it should be supported, but I don't know that it should be the only one supported. I think FAT should be supported as well, for folks who want to mount their CF and then pick it up and pop it into their PC. However, beyond the use of IDE partition tables, I can;t find a doc that explains the FS layout. Without it, it will be very hard to implement. Jim -- Jim Brain, Brain Innovations (X) firstname.lastname@example.org Dabbling in WWW, Embedded Systems, Old CBM computers, and Good Times! Home: http://www.jbrain.com Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.