Re: API Extensions

> > [...]
> > > > Yeah, might be right, but file systems could inspect the intel
> > > > partition code field for their own use (even if the partition 
> > > > add
> > > > -
> > > > on
> > > > couldn't find a nice string for it).
> > > Why should a FS be interested in that field=3F As it doesn't even
> > > exist
> > > for other partitioning systems, a FS can't (must not) rely on this
> > > value.
> > 
> > Right, it could use it as a extra validity check in combination with
> > the partitioning type. Anyway, I don't remember right now if we
> > decided
> > to drop that field, I am fine with everything ;-))
> 
> I gave up. :-) It's still there but uint32 now.

I thought we were going to do something like "Unknown Type 0xFF" as the 
standard type string for unknown types, and then drop the actual 
partition code itself, thus leaving that information accessible, but 
not in so nearly a convenient manner that it could be carelessly abused.

-Tyler