recent boot0 changes dropped a partition type?
Scott Long
scottl at samsco.org
Sun Jun 28 19:41:47 UTC 2009
Aragon Gouveia wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>> yes it was removed to save space, i am more than happy to replace 0xb
>> with 0xc if the latter turns out to be more popular.
>>
>> So far we have the following (all the rest is basically commented
>> out because we need space for other stuff):
>>
>> 131 linux
>> 165 FreeBSD
>> 166 [Open]BSD
>> 169 [Net]BSD
>> 6 Win [FAT16 >= 32MB]
>> 7 Win [NTFS]
>> 11 Win [FAT32]
>>
>> Suggestions for replacements are welcome
>
> From my bit of research now, it looks like types 6 and 11 should be
> changed. Their modern equivalents are 0xE and 0xC respectively. I
> think the only Redmond systems that still use 0x6 and 0xB pre-date
> Windows XP. I'm basing my opinions on personal experience and:
>
> http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types-1.html
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table
>
> The only caveat I see is:
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/151414
>
> But with limited space we probably should just decide to not worry about
> anything older than Windows XP...
How about not worrying about NetBSD or OpenBSD? How many people
typically multi-boot OpenBSD?
Scott
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list