Re: issues

[Jim Thomas]

>>>>> "JimM" == Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:

 JimM> Jim Thomas wrote:
 >>>>>>> "JimT" == Jim Thomas <address@hidden> writes:

 JimT> Except that it does not :<

 JimT> address@hidden:~/] # parted --script /dev/sdb mklabel gpt
 JimT> address@hidden:~/] # parted --script -- /dev/sdb mkpart gpt 0 -1s
 JimT> Error: You requested a partition from 0.00B to 7000GB.
 JimT> The closest location we can manage is 17.4kB to 7000GB.
 >> 
 >> And even stranger:
 >> 
 >> address@hidden:~/] # parted --script -- /dev/sdb mkpart gpt 17kB -1s

 JimM> You have the right idea.
 JimM> Unfortunately, parted interprets 17kB as 170000 bytes.
 JimM> To get what you want, I suggest 33s (aka 33 512-byte sectors).

 JimM>     parted -s -- /dev/sdb mkpart part-name 33s -1s

 JimM> It's best to use sector numbers as much as possible, for now.
 JimM> I expect to teach parted about suffixes like KiB, MiB, etc. soon.

 >> Error: You requested a partition from 16.9kB to 7000GB.
 >> The closest location we can manage is 17.4kB to 7000GB.

Aloha,

Sorry, but my understanding is missing several things here.

1.  I had noticed that the documentation said x000000 for kB/MB/...  And I
    seem to be behind the times since my 3Ware controller is giving me
    sizes as, e.g., 6.99TB/6.36TiB.  Last I looked, kB was 1000 and KB was
    1024.  Ah, well... :>  So even though the hardware has not used 100
    byte sectors since the IBM 1301 or so, advertising wins so I can be
    sold a 1TB disk that holds less than I expect :<

2.  Please make the documentation indicate clearly whether case matters in
    command input.  The units command table shows kB/MB/GB/TB, so that
    makes me "assume" that there is some difference for kB, like it's 1000
    based but MB is 1024 based.  The resize command example uses Mb,
    confusing me even more.

3.  Your example above says "33s".  I said to myself, "wrong, it should be
    34s".  Then I mulled that for a while and decided that you probably did
    mean 33 - you are not counting the MBR as sector 0.  Why not?  That is
    being inconsistent.  If the MBR does not count, then neither should the
    GPT.

4.  "-1s" means "the end of the disk" according to the documentation.  But
    that's not what is actually meant, as far as I can tell assuming parted
    is following the "standard" and writing a second GPT copy at the end of
    the disk (and I'm thinking it is since things still work after I've
    clobbered the low end copy with lilo :) .  "-1s" really means "-34s"
    (or is it "-33s" or maybe even "-35s"?).  Again, that's inconsistent,
    whether the MBR counts or not.

IMHO, I should be able to say

    mkpart root 0GB 7000GB

and have it create a whole disk partition with no complaints.

Mahalo for listening,
Jim