On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 22:09 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:57 -0500, Phillip Susi wrote: > > Why? > Sure... some people (including myself) have pointed out arguments in the > thread over at the dm-crypt mailinglist, like: > - for plain dm-crypt it's a "good" way to make it recognisable > - partitioning tools can use it to hint what a partition contains > - and after all, partition types do exist, whether they make sense and > are used or not... and I think it's better to have some standardised > value which people may set (if they want) even if it's nowhere used,.. > instead of having them set something which may actually cause issues > even if only in the future. > > > Linux doesn't use partition IDs. > Phew... that's not fully true... not even for the kernel which I think > still contains the code to do MD auto assembly with 0.9 superblocks when > some MBR partition type is set... > > And there are probably many tools (fdisk ;-) ) out there which some how > use or at least display the types. I don't have any particular objections to this. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
