partition table

[Jeff Vian]

James Wilkinson wrote:

>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).
>
>  
>
This action is why I *dislike* Disk Druid.  If I create partitons in a 
certain order, that is the order I expect them to be in when done, not 
some arbitary order the "Druid" thinks is best.

>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.
>
>  
>