[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Disk addresses in MB

From: Mathias Koerber
Subject: Re: Disk addresses in MB
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 09:41:53 +0800

$PARTED_UNITS, ~/.parted.conf, /usr/lcoal/etc/parted.conf

I don't like any of these.  Parted probably isn't used very frequently...
users won't want to save configurations.

Environment variables can't be set while parted is running.

but just before. For switching them while parted is running
a simple command ´units xxx´ may suffice.
I thought you were looking fora *default* setting...

You can't use it.  But who cares, it's really small!
Parted sorts out this kind of stuff automagically.  The user doesn't
need to worry.  And, it's too hard for the user worry, unless
they want to learn some number theory.  There is no way I would do
the maths myself.

My problem with fractional MBs is that it´s almost impossible to
figure out where *exactly* a partition ends and the next one starts.

Why is this important?

because when I twiddle with my partition table, I want to be
        a) in control
        b) at least in the know exactly what parted is doing
        c) able to understand what it´s going to do

Let's just say an interface that deas with discrete units is much more
confidence inspiring than something that converts such addresses into
a fractional amount, potentially rounding or truncating.

The highest precision I have seen parted use is 3 digits,
which means 1KB of space. MOst disks use sectors of
512Bytes and partition in clusters of x of them.
As shown in my earlier example, sometimes parted
shows 0.31MB (31KB) between partitions, sometimes
0.32. To me that looks like a rounding error, which
I´d rather not have to worry about when dealing with
addresses which are to all intents and purposes integers

I *like* parted and what it can do, I just think it should
use more practical units..

Mathias Koerber

reply via email to

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