Re: Partitioning rethink

Tyler Dauwalder <tyler-cyCl/[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > > > > OpenTracker also displays volumes that aren't mountable. 
> > > > > Perhaps
> > > > > we
> > > > > should just have a "mountable" flag=3D3D3D3D3F In any way, if 
> > > > > there
> > > > > is no
> > > > > file
> > > > > system for this partition, it just can't be mountable :))
> > > > Is there a reason unmountable volumes are displayed=3D3D3F
> > > 
> > > Just for the user, so that he knows "yes, it does recognize the
> > > partition (my precious data aren't lost), but it can't mount 
> > > them,
> > > because the system might not know about the file system".
> > > Dunno if it really achieves this, since it could also mean "Yes, 
> > > it
> > > sees the partition, but it can't mount it, because all of my 
> > > precious
> > > data are lost" :-))
> > > 
> > > If a reason could be added, that would probably be the best way:
> > > - "unsupported file system" if no file system could be found
> > > - "corrupted data" if the file system check returned 
> > > B=3D3D5FBAD=3D3D5FDATA -
> > >  that
> > > should be returned if the partition is recognized as fitting, but
> > > some
> > > of its parameters are not, i.e. the volume has all BFS magic 
> > > values,
> > > but the block size does not match the real amount, or similar 
> > > things.
> > 
> > BPartition could be extended by a method Status(), which would 
> > return
> > something like
> > B=3D5FPARTTITION=3D5F{PARTITIONED,MOUNTED,UNMOUNTED,CORRUPT,UNSUPPORTED
> > =3D5FDISK=3D5FSY
> > STEM}.
> 
> I added:
> 
> // partition statuses
> enum {
> 	B=5FPARTITION=5FVALID,
> 	B=5FPARTITION=5FCORRUPT,
> 	B=5FPARTITION=5FUNRECOGNIZED,
> }
> 
> uint32 BPartition::Status() const;
> 
> I didn't want to exclude the possibility of mountable partitioning 
> systems, and 
> it just didn't seem right including mounting info in the list (though 
> I'm open 
> to changing that if you really think it's a good idea). What'd'y'all 
> think=3F

That's OK, too.

CU, Ingo