Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #187334

Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors

Show all headers | View raw

Hi,

Gene Heskett's parted wrote:
> > > Start? 163,840B
> > > End? 167,772,160B
> > > Error: The maximum head value is 254.

i wrote:
> > I think it takes the commas for a CHS addrss and the "772" for heads.
> >   https://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/html_node/unit.html

> I don't recall that from the manpage, must need to up the marigold dose 
> which helps preserve a diabetics eyesight.

I do not find this explicitely in the description of parted command "unit".
But the printed numbers in the examples have no commas except the ones
from the "unit chs print" run. Others look like "120780".
Further it says
  "CHS and cylinder units are not supported as a suffix."
So there must be another way to specify them as input numbers.

This all surrounds a hole in the shape of two commas.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-27 14:50 +0200
  Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2017-09-27 15:10 +0200
    Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2017-09-27 15:40 +0200
    Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-27 17:40 +0200
      Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2017-09-27 18:10 +0200
        Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-27 19:30 +0200
          Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2017-09-27 21:20 +0200
      Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-09-27 18:40 +0200
      Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2017-09-27 19:30 +0200
        Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-27 19:40 +0200
  Re: disk partitioners vs disk with 2048 byte phusical sectors Cousin Stanley <cousinstanley@gmail.com> - 2017-09-27 19:40 +0200

csiph-web