[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: PATCH: fix gcc bug and big-endian issues for GPT

From: Matt_Domsch
Subject: RE: PATCH: fix gcc bug and big-endian issues for GPT
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 09:31:56 -0600

> 1. It wouldn't make the code work on big-endian machines.
> 2. It wouldn't fix the problems with partition unique GUIDs having the
>    wrong byte-order.
> 3. Kernel code has been changed is a similar way, so it makes 
> some sense to
>    keep parted in step.
> 4. Matt Domsch suggested this as the right way to go.
> That said, (1) is not important at the moment

And if Intel's "little-endian-only doctrine were to hold across the board,
never", but Intel's not the only game in town.

> (2) doesn't seem to have causes any problems so far,

But it could in theory later.

> (3) and (4) are a matter of opinion.

I took my direction here from conversations with David Mosberger (IA-64 port
maintainer), Linus, and Alan over how to do this "cleanly" given that Intel

> > The 1.6.x gpt code is basically a rewrite.
> Yes, I know.  I was planning on doing a sinilar patch for 1.6, but
> didn't see much urgency until my copyright issues are resolved.
> > BTW: if we get 1.6.0 out soon (like, once gpt is fixed, tommorrow is
> > fine by me...), then is there a good reason to fix 1.4.x gpt as
> > well?  Since the code is so different, it's probably not worth
> > the effort to maintain both gpt implementations...

I think there is.  1.4.x will live on for another 6-9 months minimum in the
distros, probably more.
> Debian woody release is "any day now", and will release with 
> 1.4 as the
> default parted version.  RedHat is using 1.4 at the moment, no idea
> whether they would immediately switch or not.

I can tell you that.  No. :-)  Not that MSW and company don't like parted
(obviously they do), but you've probably seen the Red Hat public beta for
their next release, and it's got 1.4.24.  No way would they change to 1.6.x
before they release - they'd pick it up next time.  So we've got to fix
1.4.x and 1.6.x both.  (I've had to do this with the kernel and it's just
time-consuming: 2.4.x and 2.5.x trees for the IA-64 port, 2.4.x for Marcelo
and occasionally Alan, and 2.5.x for DaveJ and occasionally Linus.  That's
essentially the same work 6 times.  So, I'm looking into BitKeeper to help.

That said, I'm really glad that Richard has uncovered as many problems with
my implementation as he has, and has stepped up to the plate to help fix


Matt Domsch
Sr. Software Engineer
Dell Linux Solutions www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com
#1 US Linux Server provider for 2001!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]