On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:15:18AM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote: > On 10/16/2012 8:38 AM, Petr Uzel wrote: > >> What happens if the old partition was NOT an extended partition, > >> but the new one is? In other words, we are removing a primary > >> partition and replacing it with a primary that starts in the > >> same place? Then wouldn't this change prevent parted from > >> complaining that it couldn't make the change if the partition is > >> in use? > > > > Isn't this a bit of a contrived case? :) No, really, good point - > > I'll try to reproduce this scenario and check what can be done > > about it. > > Maybe you could add a check that the existing kernel partition table > has a length <= 2 sectors, then it should be safe to assume that the > partition is already an extended, so if the new partition is also > extended, then we don't care if removing it fails.
Good idea, thanks. I'll send v2 shortly. Petr -- Petr Uzel IRC: ptr_uzl @ freenode
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
