Re: LBA48 partitioning scheme

On Thursday 02 June 2005 21:40, Andrew de Quincey wrote:
> > >As I said, if the Xbox-Linux community wants to consider
> > > themselves/their product as '100% separate' from the Xbox-Kernel, then
> > > it should just take over the entire drive/don't bother trying to
> > > co-exist with Xbox-Kernel. That's a perfectly valid position to take -
> > > although I believe you'll get less people downloading
> > > Xbox-Linux/converting their Xbox's to be 100% Linux.
> >
> > As you say, coexist. So Xbox-Linux supports the standard.
>
> If you don't like the feature don't use it and it won't affect you. As for
> "standard" - xbox linux itself is hardly an MS approved and signed
> application - which is really what defines whether software running on the
> xbox is standard or not :)
>
> I will be submitting the patches to the list no matter what. What happens
> then is up to those who have CVS access who review the code.
>
> Incidentally, they're nearly ready - just writing a really simple disk
> partitioner for use under linux and that'll be it.

I don't intend to come across as hostile in a personal sense, so please don't 
interpret my response as such.

Personally, my feelings are that xbox-linux should not go out of its way to 
support 'illegal' stuff on the xbox - and a partition table designed for use 
with an illegal bios, and ONLY with an illegal bios (e.g. evox, xecuter 
bioses) falls into that category.

I suspect that most of the team probably feel this way, although I don't 
pretend to speak for them.  

We have made an effort to support things that fall into one of two categories:

a)  Things that interoperate with the legal, and pre-existing MS applications 
- fatx, and MS partition support, basically.

b)  Things that are linux-native.

Supporting this partition table 'standard', which is basically the de-facto 
standard for illegal bioses, and is used by nothing else, falls into neither 
of those categories.

While this of course doesn't restrict your freedom in posting your patches to 
this list, I think it is something that we (we being the developers with CVS 
commit access ;) ) should consider, and decide whether to alter the above 
outlined policy.    My personal feeling is that we shouldn't, but I would be 
keen to hear, and obviously respect the feelings of the majority.

Also, from a technical sense, I dislike another type of partition table 
layout, especially with such a narrow area of usefulness.   The existing xbox 
hardcoded partition offsets are bad enough, without another quirky system 
which is xbox-only.  

David

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCn3egOIrGtzS07WgRAuM6AKCuNVWS2sBl4GgEwSUGyJe8VGhrqgCdHdI2
bRRkWfJmrkQmvW597c73Evk=
=kFzN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----