On Saturday, 2 May 2020 09:39:12 BST tu...@posteo.de wrote: > On 05/02 09:49, Andrea Conti wrote: > > > I think, I feel better if I repartitioning/reformat both drives, > > > though. > > > > It's not necessary, but if it makes you feel better by all means do so. > > > > > *GPT/MBR > > > From a discussion based on a "GPT or MBR for my system drive" in > > > conjunction with UEFI it was said, that GPT is more modern and > > > save. > > > > More modern I concur. For the rest it's mainly about features: >2TB > > partitions and way more metadata, plus not having to bother with CHS > > values which make no sense in today's drives. And being able to define >4 > > partitions without littering the disk with extended boot records, which > > is probably the only thing I'd call "safer". > > > > My point was that none of this is relevant in an external drive which is > > under 1TB and will only hold a single partition starting at sector 1 and > > spanning the rest of the disk. A system drive, especially if booting from > > UEFI is a different case for which GPT absolutely makes sense. > Ok, the other way around: Does GPT hurt more than MBT on a external HD > used for backup puporses (no boot), has 1T and 1 partion of that size?
Unless you're planning to boot from Windows XP or some antiquated old LiveCD, a GPT partitioning scheme is better in *all* respects and it is more robust than MBR because: - The partitioning tables created by GPT are backed up at the end of the disk. - GPT uses CRC make sure its data is intact, or will warn of corruption and attempt to restore from the back up. > > > My question was meant not so much as "MBR or GPT?" > > > but more whether there are some variants of GPT (with > > > protected MBR for example -- which was completly new to me), > > > which I should use or avoid. > > > > There are really no "variants" of GPT. The protective MBR is only there to > > make all space in the disk look allocated to MBR partitioning tools that > > are not GPT-aware, and is automatically written for you by all GPT > > partitioning tools. > > > > In addition to the opaque entry of type 0xee, this MBR can also contain > > entries pointing to at least some of the actual partitions; this is > > called a 'hybrid' MBR and allows MBR-only access to partitions that are > > within the limits of MBR addressing (start and end sector <2TB). These > > are only useful in very specific cases an I would consider them a hack > > more than a solution; while gpt-fdisk has some support for creating > > hybrid MBRs (don't know about fdisk), you won't get one unless you > > specifically ask for it. > Thanks of the information! :) > > > > But: Are rescue systems for USB-stick more UEFI/GPT aware nowadays > > > or "traditionally" based on MBR/BIOS-boot? > > > > I think that anything that's not ancient will have tools and kernel > > support for both MBR and GPT, and will boot fine in both BIOS and UEFI > > modes.> > > > One thing I found is really handy: An USB-stick with an rEfind > > > installation. As long as your PC supports UEFI (or can switched to it) > > > rEfind is able to boot "everything" without prior configuration. > > > > You can probably do the same with GRUB2, albeit in a way less > > user-friendly fashion :) But why do you consider the ability to boot > > anything but the rescue system itself important in a rescue system? > Recently a BIOS update deleted all UEFI entries and the system no > longer boots. With rEfind from a USBstick I was able to boot > the sustem nonetheless and the reinstallation of grub solves > the problem. > Task accomplished! :) > > > > Some rescue-system which really shines and with which you have made good > > > experiences? > > > > My usual go-to is SystemRescueCD (the old 5.x gentoo-based one). > > > > andrea > > Thanks for the info, Andrea! > > Cheers! > Meino Any up to date Linux LiveCD/USB should be able to boot your PC and automatically recognise its GPT partitioning.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
