Cfdisk VS Fdisk??

Greetings: Using both Fdisk and Cfdisk for years I've never run into
the latest "discovery," and was wondering if anyone else has
experienced it..

Various MotherBoards and, mostly, Slackware distribs, I've
standardised on Slack 9.0 or 9.1, kernel 2.4.20 or 2.4.22 on all
machines..

Evaluating a Tyan S1564S MB with Intel 430HX chipsets; Cfdisk and
Fdisk report radical differences depending on which of four HD's I've
tried.. Two WD Caviar 2340's, 340mB, were manipulated by Cfdisk OK
but Fdisk reported _no_ partitions at all.. (In the past I've noted
differences in byte amounts, etc, but never this.)

At first I thought it was because of the older drives so I fitted a
Maxtor 20gB drive and got the same report.. Fitting a Seagate, 8gB,
fdisk reported correctly with it.. (In all cases a single drive
attached to Primary IDE as Master.)

Reading man fdisk, it surprised me to see the author saying to not
use fdisk because Cfdisk was better and sfdisk should be used if it's
features needed... "Too many bugs," he or she wrote...

Is this something to be concerned about? Or just one of the many
anomolies we've learned to live with thru the years?? TIA..
--

Hal - in Terra Alta, WV - Slackware GNU/Linux 9.0 (2.4.20-1)
..
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Cfdisk VS Fdisk??

At 08:15 AM 3/13/2005 -0500, Hal MacArgle wrote:

>Greetings: Using both Fdisk and Cfdisk for years I've never run into
>the latest "discovery," and was wondering if anyone else has
>experienced it..
>
>Various MotherBoards and, mostly, Slackware distribs, I've
>standardised on Slack 9.0 or 9.1, kernel 2.4.20 or 2.4.22 on all
>machines..
>
>Evaluating a Tyan S1564S MB with Intel 430HX chipsets; Cfdisk and
>Fdisk report radical differences depending on which of four HD's I've
>tried.. Two WD Caviar 2340's, 340mB, were manipulated by Cfdisk OK
>but Fdisk reported _no_ partitions at all.. (In the past I've noted
>differences in byte amounts, etc, but never this.)
>
>At first I thought it was because of the older drives so I fitted a
>Maxtor 20gB drive and got the same report.. Fitting a Seagate, 8gB,
>fdisk reported correctly with it.. (In all cases a single drive
>attached to Primary IDE as Master.)
>
>Reading man fdisk, it surprised me to see the author saying to not
>use fdisk because Cfdisk was better and sfdisk should be used if it's
>features needed... "Too many bugs," he or she wrote...
>
>Is this something to be concerned about? Or just one of the many
>anomolies we've learned to live with thru the years?? TIA..


I've seen similar behavior in the past, and it proved to be a versioning
issue ... I was using an up-to-date cfdisk (on the Debian installer disk)
and an old fdisk (from I can't guess where ... probably a neglected Debian
install).

I recall seeing it around the time drives hit the 150 GB range, and then
moving to the latest fdisk dealt with it. At this point, I don't recall if
the issue was actually drive size, or if it was CFS remapping of some sort
associated with the mobo chipset.

I don't know what version of fdisk Slackware is shipping. MY Debian-Sid system
is perhaps six months out of date, and it has fdisk version 2.12 ("fdisk
-v") and cfdisk and cfdisk 2.12 (cfdisk -v"). With these versions, I've
seen no problems with drives up to 250 GB or so.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Cfdisk VS Fdisk??

Ray Olszewski wrote:

> I don't know what version of fdisk Slackware is shipping. MY Debian-Sid
> system
> is perhaps six months out of date, and it has fdisk version 2.12 ("fdisk
> -v") and cfdisk and cfdisk 2.12 (cfdisk -v"). With these versions, I've
> seen no problems with drives up to 250 GB or so.

My Slackware v9.1, kernel 2.4.22, has
fdisk v2.12 &
cfdisk v 2.12
;-)

HTH, Chuck

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Cfdisk VS Fdisk??

Greetings Ray and Chuck; thanks for your input.. I'm using v 2.12 of
both Fdisk and CFdisk, neither of which was the problem so the
subject line was, actually, in error..

Apprently I had three malfunctions at a time, masking the true
problem: One bad HD, a flaky flat HD cable and me... Doing all this
on a newly received MB didn't help.. Changing more than one
parameter at a time not a good idea sometime..

The HD is in the eCycle carton getting ready for Earth Day and the
cable, either evaluated critically or in the copper recycle bin..

All of the above coupled with me, somehow, losing the CMOS set up and
having to restore defaults and go from there - didn't help... Messing
with older, circa '92, drives didn't help either..

Back to the drawing board, later, with a newer drive, etc...

Appreciate!!. Enjoying the list that supplies much of my learning
curve..


On 03-13, chuck gelm wrote:
> Ray Olszewski wrote:
>
> >I don't know what version of fdisk Slackware is shipping. MY Debian-Sid
> >system
> >is perhaps six months out of date, and it has fdisk version 2.12 ("fdisk
> >-v") and cfdisk and cfdisk 2.12 (cfdisk -v"). With these versions, I've
> >seen no problems with drives up to 250 GB or so.
>
> My Slackware v9.1, kernel 2.4.22, has
> fdisk v2.12 &
> cfdisk v 2.12
> ;-)
>
> HTH, Chuck
>

--

Hal - in Terra Alta, WV - Slackware GNU/Linux 9.0 (2.4.20-1)
..
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs