another gpt vs mbr (sanity) check

[Andriy Gapon]

on 08/03/2010 19:55 Marcel Moolenaar said the following:
> On Mar 8, 2010, at 9:48 AM, Pete French wrote:
> 
>>> To clarify: the protective MBR is there only to protect the GPT
>>> disk from tools that do not understand the GPT. Any GPT-aware
>>> tool will treat the disk as a GPT disk. Consequently: the MBR
>>> is inferior to the GPT...
>> The queston is then, why isn't Windows treating it as GPT ?
> 
> Ask Microsoft. So far I've only seen violations to the spec. At
> least Apple kept to the spirit of it...

According to my understanding it's the opposite as much as I hate saying this.
My understanding is that valid GPT scheme _must_ provide only a protective MBR,
i.e. MBR where there is only partition and it is of type 0xEE.
That is, any "hybrid MBR" is not a valid GPT scheme.
Google turns up a lot of stuff on this topic.


-- 
Andriy Gapon