Michal Suchanek wrote: > On 14 August 2011 20:10, Jim Meyering <j...@meyering.net> wrote: > >>> Parted is now at version 3.0; now is a fine time to fix the long-standing >>> problems. Please go through the code with a nanometer-spaced comb and fix >>> it. >>> - Please choose one absolute byte where partitions can begin. Make it >>> consistent throughout the entire program. Publish this number. >> >> Not possible. >> The numbers differ depending on which partition table type you use. >> > > I am not surprised that gparted is the mess we see now with this approach. > > A partition starts where it starts whatever table/label is used to > describe it. All the tables and labels I know can describe partitions > with sector precision so there is no excuse for gparted to not do so.
You seem to be confusing gparted (the GUI) and parted, which includes a library, libparted, and a command-line interface. gparted *does* do the type of aligning (e.g., snap-partition-start-sector-and-length-to-1MiB) that the OP wants, while the lower-level parted does not. > If the units for gpt or apple partition map differ they should still > not pose a problem for aligned partitions. It's not about units. With a GPT partition table, the minimum starting sector number is not the same as the minimum when using a DOS partition table. If you want the features of gparted while using the lower-level parted, you have to do the math yourself, like gparted does. _______________________________________________ bug-parted mailing list bug-parted@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-parted