partition table

[James Wilkinson]

dethcrush wrote:
> Is core2 partition manager better than core1?
> I had some serious problems with core1.
> 1 Size Partions were inserted between the original	
> ones. Install couldn't find any data after that.

Colin Charles replied:
> How about giving it a go and telling us? Did you Bugzilla the "problem"
> you encountered with Core 1?

Sounds very like the one I reported:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109812
Six months later it's still "Status: New".

(I had had a nicely laid out disk, with the partitions numbered in
the order they appeared on disk. Anaconda thought I didn't have enough
space in /var, so I deleted and recreated /var and /usr.

Disk Druid renumbered all the partitions after /var and /usr, including
a VFAT partition, giving the new /var and /usr the highest partition
numbers).

As I pointed out at the time, some software will refuse to handle this,
considering it a straight bug; Fedora 1 fdisk prints a warning message;
if there'd been an NT-based OS on that partition, then that would
probably have been hosed; and if anything else rewrites the partition
table ever, the chances are it will put everything back into physical
order, moving everything round AGAIN.

It will probably take me a while to get time to experiment with FC2.

-- 
E-mail address: james@ | Q. "Why can't I print?"
westexe.demon.co.uk    | A. "Because you're not a printer."
                       | -- Stephen Judd