Daniel Reurich wrote: > > That would be nice. The 1.1 superblock is no good as the bootsector > goes in the same place, and 1.2 is where I expect grub would be writing > data too. I'll check this though. Grub still needs patching to > understand v1.X superblocks, so that could include blacklisting the > location of a v1.2 superblock location and some for the write-intent > bitmap. (Is there a way to determine where the w-i bitmap gets located > and how big it is from the super block.) > > I'd say put lets reserve the first 64K (2 cylinders) for boot and > superblock. > I say let's tell people to do the only sane thing and carve out an appropriate chunk using existing partitioning methods. Anything else is reinventing the wheel, badly, at the wrong level. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
