This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Possible Bug in /proc/partitions ??
On Jun 21 09:14, Chris January wrote:
> Bengt-Arne Fjellner wrote:
>
> > either /proc/prtitions has something wrong or i have.
> > This is how it looks.
> > $ cat /proc/partitions
> > major minor #blocks name
> >
> > 8 0 19535040 sda OK
> > 8 16 78124095 sdb OK
> > 8 17 56196 sdb1 OK
> > 8 18 61978770 sdb2 OK
> > 8 19 514080 sdb3 OK
> > 8 20 15575017 sdb4 extended no name??
> > 8 21 14546826 sdb5 found as sdb4
> > 8 22 1020127 sdb6 extended no name??
> > 8 25 1020096 sdb9 found as sdb5
> > 8 32 120624052 sdc OK
> > 8 33 120624021 sdc1 OK
> > 8 48 58613152 sdd OK
> > 8 49 58613121 sdd1 OK
> > 8 65 253984 sde1 extended no name??
> > 8 69 2062305 sde5 found as sde1
> >
> >
> > I dont think that the extended partitions should have a device??
> > and i find the other partitions as i have stated.
>
>
> Thanks for the bug report. I will look into this when I get the time.
> Incidentally, do you know what Linux's behaviour is in this regard, i.e.
> if you run the same command on Linux (if you have it installed), what is
> the result?
This should be solved in CVS. I've applied a patch yesterday.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/