Dave Reisner <d <at> falconindy.com> writes: > ... > Why do you think this is contradictory? The filesystem type and > partition type are two disparate types. Yes, you are right, technically. But I mentioned it because it bothers me, and confuses slightly. Let me explain why, and I reserve the right to be wrong if I miss some aspects of it. It is about the business of partition types and file system types, perhaps even partitions and file systems in general. Example: # lsblk -o name,fstype,parttype,label,mountpoint /dev/sdb NAME FSTYPE PARTTYPE LABEL MOUNTPOINT sdb ├─sdb1 ntfs 0x83 └─sdb2 ext4 0x17 # fdisk -l /dev/sdb ... Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type /dev/sdb1 * 2048 7522303 7520256 3.6G 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 7522304 15356159 7833856 3.8G 17 Hidden HPFS/NTFS # This is what I mean, a mixture of partition types (with their type names suggesting something) and file system types, contradicting each other at least in descriptions. Somehow I have an impression that there was an intention at some time in the past to associate partition types with only certain file system types. But it never worked, or was misunderstood, or was abandoned. That's my guess. There is some evidence to that assumption (note that they are actually contradictory in their wording): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_partition "The partition type code for a primary partition can either correspond to a file system contained within (e.g. 0x07 means either an NTFS or an OS/2 HPFS file system) or indicate that the partition has a special use (e.g. code 0x82 usually indicates a Linux swap partition). The FAT16 and FAT32 file systems have made use of a number of partition type codes due to the limits of various DOS and Windows OS versions. Though a Linux operating system may recognize a number of different file systems (ext4, ext3, ext2, ReiserFS, etc.), they have all consistently used the same partition type code: 0x83 (Linux native file system)." http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/partition-types.html "A partition is labeled to host a certain kind of file system (...). Such a file system could be the linux standard ext2 file system or linux swap space, or even foreign file systems like (Microsoft) NTFS or (Sun) UFS." I would like to get to the point here. Why not abandon the partition and file system dichotomy. Why not use just one term, let's call it fspart (file system partition), encompassing functionality of both partition and file system. For example, fspart would mean "none" for empty space (no fs), ext4, swap, NTFS, etc. Basically, let's eliminate partition and file system as known today. jb -- 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
