Ethan Benson schrieb:
>
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 11:11:15PM -0500, Paul Blazejowski wrote:
>
> > That's what i thought about using swap...that the loader would get
> > wiped, not that my swap is used a lot these days (1gig of ram helps).
>
> i don't think it would matter whether your swap was actually used or
> not, from looking a the first 1k on my swap partition there appears to
> be some consistent pattern of data, i expect (but havn't tested) that
> it would be wiped the moment you ran swapon. either way why anyone
> would want to have thier system randomly not boot is beyond me ;-)
I agree. The better way would be to create just a small primary
partition and use this to place LILO. Since Linux doesn't insist on
sitting on a primary partition, it should always be possible to keep one
only for LILO.
>
> > I grabbed latest LILO and put it on MBR (they way i intended to do it
> > long time ago).It works all fine now for both XFS on / and win2k.
> >
> > But teh thing is that it all worked till now,LILO was happy and so was
>
> that is not possible, XFS has not left room at block zero of the
> partition for as long as its existed, lilo when told you install on a
> partition always puts it within the first 512 bytes, there is zero
> chance that installing lilo will not result in the destruction of the
> XFS superblock. you must be mistaken about how you had lilo configured.
>
> > XFS...unless i had done it all wrong.Now i wonder wheater to report this
> > to LILO maintainer and hope it will get fixed/changed?
>
> it cannot be fixed, all that can be done is for lilo to check for XFS
> magic before scribbling on partitions, and abort if it finds one.
>
> --
> Ethan Benson
> http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
|