Daniel,
I have tried RC3 and the final MSDN release of W2K with out of order
entries, and they seem to be OK with out of order FAT, NetWare, and
Extended partitions. I have seen some problems with HPFS partitions
that have logical drives assigned in them with the new Veritas on-disk
formats for W2K, but these seem to be bugs, not any incompatibility
issues, and were restricted to RC2 (there was also everal places they
were taking KeSpinLock then touching page pool -- nasty). There were
some problems with this on RC2 with the partition API, but our latest
seems to not have problems with this. I'll test some more tonight, and
if I see what you describe, I'll post it to the list.
Jeff
Daniel.Egger@suse.de wrote:
>
> On 22 Feb, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote:
>
> > It is rumoured that Windows 2000 does not accept partition
> > tables that are not ordered according to disk order.
> > (DOS / Win95 / Win98 have no problems, and neither has Linux)
> > If this is true then fdisk must become somewhat stricter.
> > The present version has an expert command f that does a sort.
> > [But, let me repeat, nobody tried this. However, it compiles.]
>
> > If anyone happens to have a Windows 2000 system nearby,
> > I would be interested in hearing about what it thinks
> > about unsorted (or otherwise less usual) partition tables,
> > both during an install and during normal operation.
>
> Well, I shot up W2K. I do not know however whether adding
> the partitions did this or some LILO magic. Should reordering
> help to let boot again? Not that I wanted to.... :/
>
> --
>
> Servus,
> Daniel
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 23 2000 - 21:00:31 EST