Various Topics on Linux

..d

I have been doing some partitioning and i notice that when i use fdisk that
i am only allowed to make 4 primary partition.

Is this normal? Because alot of the partitioning theme required more than 4
partition on the hardrive.

..m.. ..lla..

zod <zod1979@TAKEOUTTHISPARTyahoo.ca> wrote:
> I have been doing some partitioning and i notice that when i use fdisk that
> i am only allowed to make 4 primary partition.
^^^^^^^
>
> Is this normal?

yes

> Because alot of the partitioning theme required more than 4
> partition on the hardrive.

then you will need to create an extended partition and logical drives
within this extended partition.

hth, armin

--

my life, my universe, my everything
http://www.dtch.org

.... ..eu..

zod <zod1979@takeoutthispartyahoo.ca> wrote:
> I have been doing some partitioning and i notice that when i use fdisk that
> i am only allowed to make 4 primary partition.

That's according to the definition of a PC partion table.

> Is this normal?

It's normal and always has been that way, since PCs were frist
specified.

> Because alot of the partitioning theme required more than 4
> partition on the hardrive.

So what? None of them need be primaries!

Peter

..d

What then needs to have a primary partition? and what should be in the
logical partition?
"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:e3catb.f45.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> zod <zod1979@takeoutthispartyahoo.ca> wrote:
> > I have been doing some partitioning and i notice that when i use fdisk
that
> > i am only allowed to make 4 primary partition.
>
> That's according to the definition of a PC partion table.
>
> > Is this normal?
>
> It's normal and always has been that way, since PCs were frist
> specified.
>
> > Because alot of the partitioning theme required more than 4
> > partition on the hardrive.
>
> So what? None of them need be primaries!
>
> Peter

..o..

"zod" <zod1979@TAKEOUTTHISPARTyahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:tK2Kb.4337$D21.394617@news20.bellglobal.com.. .


I consider creating many partitions to be a waste of time. If / fills up to
the reserved limit, then you have some time before /var and /tmp fill up.
If you subdivide all the partitions, then the result is just that you bring
the time that the unreserved space is filled up forward, by wasting space.

eg if you have 1 gig left on /home and 2 gig left on /usr, but /var has only
200 meg left, then you are wasting 3 gig. And dont come back with 'you
should have calculated your usage better' .. well I cant help it if hackers
have decided to attack my system and fill up my logs ! I need to log there
attacks in case one works....


So just stick everything on one big partition , apart from swap, and forget
it.

> What then needs to have a primary partition? and what should be in the
> logical partition?

Microsoft needs to boot from a primary.

The Microsoft standard MBR boots the PRIMARY partition that is marked
active.

And I dont know if the OS knows how to boot from a logical...


What should be in logical partitions ?
Well you can put linux on any primary or logical partitions.

Microsoft wont let you have two primary microsoft partitions ( as far as
dos fdisk doesnt let you make them - it will only create logicals if there
is already a FAT type primary .. ) . However it will let you use them if
you make them, so you can make them under linux..
I havent bothered testing it with XP...


What you also have to realise is that the PC hardware doesnt know about
partitions.
The only thing that the hardware cares about is that the first sector has a
bootable code in it - the MBR. The standard partition table is just an
agreed standard for defining partitions in a table in the first sector of
the hard drive (the same sector as the MBR.. ).Because there is only room
there for 4 partitions, they then extended the scheme to include extended
partitions. The logical partitions are then defined in the partition table
in the first sector of the 'extended' primary partition... so thats how the
limit of 4 is exceeded ! The extended primary partition is then partitioned
into smaller partitions recursively ! A extended partition can only contain
two partitions - a logical partition and another extended partition ...so
recursively logical partitions are added inside a nested extended
partitions. )


like this { [sda5] { [sda6] { [sda7] { sda8] }}}}
where [ ] denotes a logical partition, and { } denotes an extended
partition,
and of course the space covered by an extended partition covers the space
used by all partitions inside it.


If you are making the disk for linux only, then there is an extension that
allows more than 4 primary partitions ? Although I dont know of a
distribution that supports this.

Windows XP can also make a drive without a standard partition table - called
dynamic drive partitioning.

Other unixen ported to Ix86 have defined partitions inside primary
partitions using their own non-standard scheme. linux hasnt done this so
far. That means they are compatible with Dos and other OS's, but then have
a way to avoid the h***les with creating many partitions.




> "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> news:e3catb.f45.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> > zod <zod1979@takeoutthispartyahoo.ca> wrote:
> > > I have been doing some partitioning and i notice that when i use fdisk
> that
> > > i am only allowed to make 4 primary partition.
> >
> > That's according to the definition of a PC partion table.
> >
> > > Is this normal?
> >
> > It's normal and always has been that way, since PCs were frist
> > specified.
> >
> > > Because alot of the partitioning theme required more than 4
> > > partition on the hardrive.
> >
> > So what? None of them need be primaries!
> >
> > Peter
>
>

..cha.. ..

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:19:07 +1100,
Leon. <noemail@noemail.noemail.com> wrote:
>
> "zod" <zod1979@TAKEOUTTHISPARTyahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:tK2Kb.4337$D21.394617@news20.bellglobal.com.. .
>
>
> I consider creating many partitions to be a waste of time. If /
> fills up to the reserved limit, then you have some time before /var
> and /tmp fill up. If you subdivide all the partitions, then the
> result is just that you bring the time that the unreserved space is
> filled up forward, by wasting space.
>
> eg if you have 1 gig left on /home and 2 gig left on /usr, but /var
> has only 200 meg left, then you are wasting 3 gig. And dont come back
> with 'you should have calculated your usage better' .. well I cant
> help it if hackers have decided to attack my system and fill up my
> logs ! I need to log there attacks in case one works....

/tmp probably shouldn't fill up, and you shouldn't let /var fill up.

> So just stick everything on one big partition , apart from swap, and
> forget it.

I'd at least have a seperate /home in case you decide to reinstall
(unusual) or change distros.

> > What then needs to have a primary partition? and what should be in the
> > logical partition?
>
> Microsoft needs to boot from a primary.
>
> The Microsoft standard MBR boots the PRIMARY partition that is marked
> active.
>
> And I dont know if the OS knows how to boot from a logical...

It won't install there in any event.

> What should be in logical partitions ?
> Well you can put linux on any primary or logical partitions.
>
> Microsoft wont let you have two primary microsoft partitions ( as far as
> dos fdisk doesnt let you make them - it will only create logicals if there
> is already a FAT type primary .. ) . However it will let you use them if
> you make them, so you can make them under linux..
> I havent bothered testing it with XP...

Works with W2K, XP shouldn't be a problem.

> What you also have to realise is that the PC hardware doesnt know
> about partitions. The only thing that the hardware cares about is
> that the first sector has a bootable code in it - the MBR. The
> standard partition table is just an agreed standard for defining
> partitions in a table in the first sector of the hard drive (the same
> sector as the MBR.. ).Because there is only room there for 4
> partitions, they then extended the scheme to include extended
> partitions. The logical partitions are then defined in the partition
> table in the first sector of the 'extended' primary partition... so
> thats how the limit of 4 is exceeded ! The extended primary partition
> is then partitioned into smaller partitions recursively ! A extended
> partition can only contain two partitions - a logical partition and
> another extended partition ...so recursively logical partitions are
> added inside a nested extended partitions. )
>
> like this { [sda5] { [sda6] { [sda7] { sda8]
> }}}} where [ ] denotes a logical partition, and { } denotes an
> extended partition, and of course the space covered by an extended
> partition covers the space used by all partitions inside it.
>
> If you are making the disk for linux only, then there is an extension
> that allows more than 4 primary partitions ? Although I dont know of
> a distribution that supports this.

Probably not a good idea.

> Windows XP can also make a drive without a standard partition table -
> called dynamic drive partitioning.

Again probably not a good idea unless you are only using XP.

> Other unixen ported to Ix86 have defined partitions inside primary
> partitions using their own non-standard scheme. linux hasnt done this
> so far. That means they are compatible with Dos and other OS's, but
> then have a way to avoid the h***les with creating many partitions.

Unix File Systems may work, but as you mentioned they may use a non
standard scheme. While Linux has some support for some Unix
filesystems, I think writing is generally not suggested. You define
slices inside a primary partition, it complicates things considerably
and you end up with the same problem of wasting space.

Btw, please don't top post.

Michael C.
--
mcsuper5@usol.com http://mcsuper5.freeshell.org/
Registered Linux User #303915 http://counter.li.org/

..o..

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:19:07 +1100, "Leon."
<noemail@noemail.noemail.com> wrote:

>
>"zod" <zod1979@TAKEOUTTHISPARTyahoo.ca> wrote in message
>news:tK2Kb.4337$D21.394617@news20.bellglobal.com. ..
>
>
>I consider creating many partitions to be a waste of time. If / fills up to
>the reserved limit, then you have some time before /var and /tmp fill up.
>If you subdivide all the partitions, then the result is just that you bring
>the time that the unreserved space is filled up forward, by wasting space.
>
>eg if you have 1 gig left on /home and 2 gig left on /usr, but /var has only
>200 meg left, then you are wasting 3 gig. And dont come back with 'you
>should have calculated your usage better' .. well I cant help it if hackers
>have decided to attack my system and fill up my logs ! I need to log there
>attacks in case one works....
>
>
>So just stick everything on one big partition , apart from swap, and forget
>it.

That is just such bad advice, I scarcely know where to begin... Are
you aware of what happens when a partition *does* fill up? What if
something went out of control, and filled the /tmp directory? If
you're running a database, mailspool or anything else in the same
partition, you can say goodbye to all the data as the files are
truncated. If you have a 200GB drive, it might take a while to run a
fsck, or worse still, if that one partition has a problem rendering it
unusable, that's everything gone.

Yes, you'll waste a bit of space with partitions, but the idea is to
help protect your data. It's also handy if you wish to install a new
OS and keep your /home directories intact.

.... ..eu..

zod <zod1979@takeoutthispartyahoo.ca> wrote:

Please do not TOP POST!!!!! Fixing.

> "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> news:e3catb.f45.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> > zod <zod1979@takeoutthispartyahoo.ca> wrote:
> > > Because alot of the partitioning theme required more than 4
> > > partition on the hardrive.
> >
> > So what? None of them need be primaries!

> What then needs to have a primary partition?

I don't know of anything - a martian? An atomic submarine? A solaris
system? A micosorft system?

> and what should be in the logical partition?

"The"??? You will have *many* logical partitions usually.

Whatever you want to put there. What do you want?

Peter

.... ..eu..

Leon. <noemail@noemail.noemail.com> wrote:
> I consider creating many partitions to be a waste of time.

Then you consider wrong, or rather you do not consider at all. Remove
the walls from the inside of your house if you think that partitioning
is silly.


> If you subdivide all the partitions, then the result is just that you bring

No it isn't. The idea is PRECISELY that you don't fill up the whole
disk by filling up one of them, just as the idea is that you don't
stink out the whole of your house when the toilet doesn't flush.

> the time that the unreserved space is filled up forward, by wasting space.

Good. That's what you want - and no, no space is "wasted". Only your
ignorance speaks.

Peter

..be.. ..ws..

P.T. Breuer wrote:

> zod <zod1979@takeoutthispartyahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> Please do not TOP POST!!!!! Fixing.
....
>>>>Because alot of the partitioning theme required more than 4
>>>>partition on the hardrive.
>>>>
>>>So what? None of them need be primaries!
>
>>What then needs to have a primary partition?

M$ OSs, extended partitions and *BSD (used to at least - don't know if
recently changed).


> I don't know of anything - a martian? An atomic submarine? A solaris
> system? A micosorft system?

Just to be perverse, I'll point out that *BSD use[sd] a primary partition
that itself sub-divided into (non-standard) logical partitions.


>>and what should be in the logical partition?

whatever would put into a primary partition, except M$ OSs, etc that require
a primary partition to boot (and run?), and [probably] an extended partition.