On 06/09/2011 01:05 AM, Tim wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 02:03 +1000, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
>> Back in the mid 70's I worked on a 1963 IBM 1130 in my high
>> school in Guam, and it had core memory, and you could see the
>> memory (all 4K of it), and had a little modual that you could plug i
On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 02:03 +1000, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
> Back in the mid 70's I worked on a 1963 IBM 1130 in my high
> school in Guam, and it had core memory, and you could see the
> memory (all 4K of it), and had a little modual that you could plug in
> another section to actually read
On 8 Jun 2011 at 7:22, Joe Zeff wrote:
Date sent: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 07:22:36 -0700
From: Joe Zeff
To: Community support for Fedora users
Subject:Re: Partition does not end on cylinder boundary
Send reply to: Community
On 06/08/2011 05:56 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> Though they were donuts pinned to cards rather than cards
> pinned to donuts :-)
Unless my memory's faded, they had several different wires threaded to
them which held them in place in a big square array. No pins, no card.
At least that was true (I
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 04:55 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> Donuts are not particularly well suited for data storage. They tend to
> be hostile to input devices.
I suppose they could lead to stale data...
> That does remind me of a very funny joke though...
>
From data, to doughnuts, to nudist j
On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 04:55:13 -0700
Craig White wrote:
> Donuts are not particularly well suited for data storage. They tend to
> be hostile to input devices.
Nonsense! They were the first successful data storage technology:
http://www.nzeldes.com/HOC/CoreMemory.htm
Though they were donuts pinne
On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 21:11 +0930, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 17:07 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > It doesn't care whether that is flash, rotating media, or indeed cards
> > pinned to donuts.
>
> Is there an RFC for the last one? ;-)
Donuts are not particularly well suited for data stora
On 6 June 2011 12:41, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 17:07 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>> It doesn't care whether that is flash, rotating media, or indeed cards
>> pinned to donuts.
>
> Is there an RFC for the last one? ;-)
>
Maybe next April? Though the pigeons might eat them.
--
imalone
--
u
On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 17:07 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> It doesn't care whether that is flash, rotating media, or indeed cards
> pinned to donuts.
Is there an RFC for the last one? ;-)
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox
On 06/05/11 09:07, Alan Cox wrote:
>> to the file's or dir's inode as possible. So, even if the a disk cylinder
>> is now a virtual thing, it still helps in organizing the disk
> The notion of a cylinder group comes from BSD, and in 4.2 BSD FFS they
> were indeed physically laid out to match the me
> to the file's or dir's inode as possible. So, even if the a disk cylinder
> is now a virtual thing, it still helps in organizing the disk
The notion of a cylinder group comes from BSD, and in 4.2 BSD FFS they
were indeed physically laid out to match the media. Linux has never done
that because b
> would you say then, that best practise would be to let anaconda create the
> /boot, / and other partitions? fdisk wouldn't align properly right?
I don't know the fdisk included with Fedora is aware of or not. Probably
best to let Anaconda do it in general.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fed
On 06/05/11 03:49, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 12:50:12 +0100
> Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
>> Does this matter?
>> If so, what can you do about it?
>> I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
>> choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
>>
>> Is it really better to give the block count?
> Tradi
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 12:50:12 +0100
> Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
> > Does this matter?
> > If so, what can you do about it?
> > I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
> > choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
> >
> > Is it really better to give the
On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 12:50:12 +0100
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Does this matter?
> If so, what can you do about it?
> I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
> choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
>
> Is it really better to give the block count?
Traditional boot loader stuff and BIOS depends on c
On 06/04/11 19:28, David wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 12:21, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 06/04/2011 10:15 PM, David wrote:
>>> On 5 June 2011 12:07, JD wrote:
On 06/04/11 19:02, David wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 11:42, JDwrote:
>> I think you can read the kernel source code as well
>
On 06/04/11 19:15, David wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 12:07, JD wrote:
>> On 06/04/11 19:02, David wrote:
>>> On 5 June 2011 11:42, JDwrote:
I think you can read the kernel source code as well
as anyone. So you have to do some homework :)
>>> [david@kablamm partition]$ rpm -qf /sbin/mkfs.
On 5 June 2011 12:21, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/04/2011 10:15 PM, David wrote:
>> On 5 June 2011 12:07, JD wrote:
>>> On 06/04/11 19:02, David wrote:
On 5 June 2011 11:42, JD wrote:
> I think you can read the kernel source code as well
> as anyone. So you have to do some homewo
On 06/04/2011 10:15 PM, David wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 12:07, JD wrote:
>> On 06/04/11 19:02, David wrote:
>>> On 5 June 2011 11:42, JD wrote:
I think you can read the kernel source code as well
as anyone. So you have to do some homework :)
>>> [david@kablamm partition]$ rpm -qf /sbin/mk
On 5 June 2011 12:15, David wrote:
>
> Partitioning is done by mkfs variants. Nothing to do with the kernel.
s/Partitioning/Filesystem creation
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/user
On 5 June 2011 12:07, JD wrote:
> On 06/04/11 19:02, David wrote:
>> On 5 June 2011 11:42, JD wrote:
>>> I think you can read the kernel source code as well
>>> as anyone. So you have to do some homework :)
>> [david@kablamm partition]$ rpm -qf /sbin/mkfs.ext3
>> e2fsprogs-1.41.9-5.fc12.i686
>>
>
On 06/04/11 19:02, David wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 11:42, JD wrote:
>> I think you can read the kernel source code as well
>> as anyone. So you have to do some homework :)
> [david@kablamm partition]$ rpm -qf /sbin/mkfs.ext3
> e2fsprogs-1.41.9-5.fc12.i686
>
> kernel ?
Well, you can peruse the latest
On 5 June 2011 11:42, JD wrote:
> I think you can read the kernel source code as well
> as anyone. So you have to do some homework :)
[david@kablamm partition]$ rpm -qf /sbin/mkfs.ext3
e2fsprogs-1.41.9-5.fc12.i686
kernel ?
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or ch
On 06/04/11 18:18, David wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 10:59, JD wrote:
>> On 06/04/11 17:36, David wrote:
>>> On 5 June 2011 10:19, Aaron Konstamwrote:
It would be better if partition ends on a cylinder boundary but the
system will still work.
>>> I am curious about *how* specifically tha
On 5 June 2011 10:59, JD wrote:
> On 06/04/11 17:36, David wrote:
>> On 5 June 2011 10:19, Aaron Konstam wrote:
>>> It would be better if partition ends on a cylinder boundary but the
>>> system will still work.
>> I am curious about *how* specifically that "it would be better".
>> In what situat
On 06/04/11 17:36, David wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 10:19, Aaron Konstam wrote:
>> On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 12:50 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>>> Does this matter?
>>> If so, what can you do about it?
>>> I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
>>> choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
>> It would be
On 06/04/11 17:19, Aaron Konstam wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 12:50 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>> Does this matter?
>> If so, what can you do about it?
>> I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
>> choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
>>
>> Is it really better to give the block count?
>>
>> I
On 5 June 2011 10:19, Aaron Konstam wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 12:50 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>> Does this matter?
>> If so, what can you do about it?
>> I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
>> choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
> It would be better if partition ends on a cylinder
On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 12:50 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Does this matter?
> If so, what can you do about it?
> I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
> choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
>
> Is it really better to give the block count?
>
> Incidentally, I notice that lshal takes a block a
On 4 June 2011 21:50, Timothy Murphy wrote:
[Partition does not end on cylinder boundary]
> Does this matter?
> If so, what can you do about it?
> I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
> choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
The message refers to an attempt to describe the end sec
On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 10:00 -0700, JD wrote:
> On 06/04/11 09:54, Tom Horsley wrote:
> > On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 09:02:48 -0700
> > JD wrote:
> >
> >> What tool did you use to create the partition in the first place.
> >> I thought that fdisk, sfdisk and gparted always round up (or down)
> >> to end
On 06/04/11 09:54, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 09:02:48 -0700
> JD wrote:
>
>> What tool did you use to create the partition in the first place.
>> I thought that fdisk, sfdisk and gparted always round up (or down)
>> to end of cylinder.
> Over the years, I have used lots of differen
On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 09:02:48 -0700
JD wrote:
> What tool did you use to create the partition in the first place.
> I thought that fdisk, sfdisk and gparted always round up (or down)
> to end of cylinder.
Over the years, I have used lots of different partitioning
tools, and one thing I have found
On 06/04/11 04:50, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Does this matter?
If so, what can you do about it?
I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
Is it really better to give the block count?
Incidentally, I notice that lshal takes a block as 512B,
w
Does this matter?
If so, what can you do about it?
I get it after partitioning with fdisk,
choosing partitions of size 50GB, etc.
Is it really better to give the block count?
Incidentally, I notice that lshal takes a block as 512B,
while fdisk has 1kB blocks.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gaylear
35 matches
Mail list logo
