Le 02.12.2014 19:27, tv.deb...@googlemail.com a écrit :
On 02/12/2014 20:48, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
[cut]
Also, what is EBR (or EPBR, which seems to be some sort of enhanced
whatever may be a EBR)?
Extended Boot Record on DOS disks ? Where information about extended
partition
On 02/12/2014 20:48, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
[cut]
Also, what is EBR (or EPBR, which seems to be some sort of enhanced
whatever may be a EBR)?
Extended Boot Record on DOS disks ? Where information about extended
partition is stored.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_boot_r
Le 20.11.2014 22:26, Scott Ferguson a écrit :
On 21/11/14 06:45, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
Might be worth fscking the disk first in case that's where the
problem lies.
Why ? fsck works on filesystems, not disks or partition tables.
Good question - because I didn't sp
On 21/11/14 06:45, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Scott Ferguson a écrit :
>>
>> Might be worth fscking the disk first in case that's where the problem lies.
>
> Why ? fsck works on filesystems, not disks or partition tables.
>
>
Good question - because I didn't spend much time thinking about it, or,
b
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
>
> Might be worth fscking the disk first in case that's where the problem lies.
Why ? fsck works on filesystems, not disks or partition tables.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas.
On 20/11/14 20:13, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Scott Ferguson a écrit :
>> On 20/11/14 12:45, Martin Read wrote:
>>> On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 20/11/14 04:06, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
>>> I think it's msdos.
AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
> On 20/11/14 12:45, Martin Read wrote:
>> On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 20/11/14 04:06, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
>> I think it's msdos.
>>> AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that number of
>>> slices. :(
MS-DOS partition tabl
Le Mon, 17 Nov 2014 16:56:51 +0100,
berenger.mo...@neutralite.org a écrit :
> Now, fact is that the hard-disk partition table is no longer correct,
> and when I plug it (it is an USB HD) into a Debian system, it makes
> udev eating all my memory, and more.
Could you please open a bugreport again
On 20/11/14 12:45, Martin Read wrote:
> On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 20/11/14 04:06, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
> I think it's msdos.
>>
>> AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that number of
>> slices. :(
>
> MSDOS extended partitions contain a linked lis
On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 20/11/14 04:06, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
I think it's msdos.
AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that number of
slices. :(
MSDOS extended partitions contain a linked list of logical partitions.
It looks, from the pattern of th
On 20/11/14 11:14, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
> Le Mer 19 novembre 2014 21:16, Scott Ferguson a écrit :
>> On 20/11/14 04:06, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
>>
>>> Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
>>>
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
>>
Le Mer 19 novembre 2014 21:16, Scott Ferguson a écrit :
> On 20/11/14 04:06, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
>
>> Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
>>>
>>>
So, what part of that disk should I extract,
On 20/11/14 04:06, "Morel Bérenger" wrote:
> Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
>>
>>> So, what part of that disk should I extract, which could be usable
>>> and sharable? Partition table, of course, whic
Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
>
>> So, what part of that disk should I extract, which could be usable
>> and sharable? Partition table, of course, which is probably at disk's
>> beginning, but how lon
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
> So, what part of that disk should I extract, which could be usable
> and sharable? Partition table, of course, which is probably at
> disk's beginning, but how long might it be?
That depends. What kind of partition table?
--
"One dis
Le 17.11.2014 17:55, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
Now, fact is that the hard-disk partition table is no longer
correct, and when I plug it (it is an USB HD) into a Debian system,
it makes udev eating all my memory, and more.
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
> Now, fact is that the hard-disk partition table is no longer
> correct, and when I plug it (it is an USB HD) into a Debian system,
> it makes udev eating all my memory, and more.
Please image the partition table so that someone can reprod
Hello.
I think most of my problem's description is in title, but here are some
more informations.
I have a hard disk on which I tried a... quite unusual... procedure to
install another OS. My try in this procedure [1] did not went well at
all, but it's not the subject of this mail.
Now, fact
J Merritt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My goal was to erase the first three partitions (because I never used
> them anymore) and combine them into one large ext2 partition for more
> data storage. (There were a total of five or six between the
> primary/extended.) Using the Ultimate Boot CD and X
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 13:27 -0700, J Merritt wrote:
> I have a machine with three fixed disks:
> hda = Windows XP (40 gb)
> hdb = (see below) (60 gb)
> hdc = ext2 partition for data storage (30 gb)
>
> hdb is the disk I'm having serious problems with. Before, the disk had
> several partitions on i
I have a machine with three fixed disks:
hda = Windows XP (40 gb)
hdb = (see below) (60 gb)
hdc = ext2 partition for data storage (30 gb)
hdb is the disk I'm having serious problems with. Before, the disk had several
partitions on it. I am not sure how many primary or secondary partitions there
Wayne Topa wrote:
> I upgraded from Debian packaged 2.4.2 kernel/headers to a kernel.org
> 2.4.3 and now a 2.4.4 kernel. Due to space limitations, I removed the deb
> kernel/header packages when I went to 2.4.3 because the deb package
> wasn't available at the time.
>
> I have not seen any proble
Subject: corrupted partition table
Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:49:20AM -0400
In reply to:Benjamin Black
Quoting Benjamin Black([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> hi everyone.
>
> a few days ago, my partition tables were fine. proof of fact: i
> installed the new kernel-ima
On 2001-04-21, Benjamin Black wrote:
> hi everyone.
>
> a few days ago, my partition tables were fine. proof of fact: i
> installed the new kernel-image-2.4.3-686 that was uploaded a few days
> ago into my boot sector, and lilo did not complain; i am now running
> that image.
Hi. I am seeing th
On 22 Apr 2001 00:44:13 +1000, Mark Purcell wrote:
>
> The very first thing to do is to take a backup copy of your existing partion
> table as any changes to the partition table can be bad. See below...
>
i did that before i even posted the first message.
> Once you have taken a backup copy you
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:49:20AM -0400, Benjamin Black wrote:
> Disk /dev/hda: 16 heads, 63 sectors, 19590 cylinders
>
> Units = cylinders of 1008 * 512 bytes
>
> Device BootStart EndBlocks Id System
> /dev/hda1 * 1 4909 2473978+ b Win95 FAT32
> Partition 1
hi everyone.
a few days ago, my partition tables were fine. proof of fact: i
installed the new kernel-image-2.4.3-686 that was uploaded a few days
ago into my boot sector, and lilo did not complain; i am now running
that image. today, i was trying to set up my cd writer, so i added
append="hdd=i
Hello,
I'm trying to use the OS/2 3.0 bootloader to select Debian/GNU Linux, DOS or
OS/2 upon boot-up.
The OS/2 fdisk does not work. It works OK on another hard drive. If I hit
control/alt/delete to reboot, bios gives me a corrupted partition table error.
How can I clean up the part
28 matches
Mail list logo
