On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:25 AM, <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 08:35:26PM +0530, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote: >> The real problem, here is just that partitioning-tools should create >> partitions that can work with both XP as well as Windows7. May be distro >> installers, should ask the user which compatibility he needs. > > 4k aligned sectors will *work* with Windows XP, will it not? It's > just simply a matter of Windows XP, being really ancient, doesn't > create properly alligned partitions by default. > > And how often are we going to see Windows XP systems with these new 4k > physical sector drives anyway, where the first OS to touch the > partition is Windows XP? And in the case where this does happy, the > resulting partition will be result in terribly performance for Windows > XP as well as Linux. > > What's the specific scenario which you are trying to solve, and how > likely is it to occur in real life? > > - Ted Ted, Apparently the real issue is Win2K, not XP. It seems to require the boot partition and possibly all partitions start on a cylinder boundary. And may have 255/63 hard-coded in to define what a cylinder is. I agree with the apparent consensus that a 2010 era linux partitioner does not need to be Win2K compatible. If someone wants to install Win2K they will need to either use an older generation partitioner to create the partitions or use specific command-line args to force a non-optimal alignment. I do think the linux partitioners should provide a way to force a cylinder alignment. Tejun, I would like to see your doc describe how to force a win2k compatible partition layout. fyi: The same issue apparently also exists for users still running OS/2. Greg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
