Re: parted's cp command for FAT32, and LBA/CHS/NTLDR missing woes

[Andrew Clausen]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 10:11:11AM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 04:35:21AM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> > > Irrelevant. Bootloaders, mini-drivers are free to ignore LBA flag for
> > > whatever many reasons.
> > 
> > The Microsoft FAT bootloaders respect the LBA flag, however.  At least,
> > all the versions I have reverse engineered do, and I haven't seen
> > any evidence to the contrary.
> 
> If you can't reproduce then google or read the reports people write about
> recovering from boot problems using FAT32 with LBA flag set when they use
> 
>       sfdisk -d device | sfdisk --no-reread -H{255,240,etc} device
> 
> The above command only changes the CHS. If you were right then the above
> wouldn't work.

I couldn't find any instances with Google where (after about 10 min of trying).
In particular, none of the matches for this query are relevant:

        "fat32 (lba)" -ntfs -yast -suse xp "dual boot" problem

> > The NTFS ones don't always.
> 
> The issue is filesystem independent.

Well, the boot loaders certainly aren't filesystem independent.  The
Microsoft's fat16/fat32 boot loaders I've looked at support both CHS and
LBA in a single image.  It's possible that the OEM option to disable LBA
change the boot loader to a different one, however.

Cheers,
Andrew