Re: Variable path of one-partition devices
- From: Luxman <notime@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 02:19:30 +0100
Fisrt of all thank you for replying ;-)
> Luxman <notime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Some USB devices are partitioned. Some aren't.
>> Ok.Let's say I got two USB pen drives by MyFlash and I use them the first
>> time on M$ XP: I then got them both automatically partitioned with a FAT
>> fs, right?
> No. Why on earth do you think so? Do you have an MS application that
> partitions and reformats USB pen drives? And you use it?
You are right!I meant that M$ XP formats the device, sorry about that...
>> Yet maybe when I plug them upon Linux maybe I get the /dev/sdx
>> path for one and a /dev/sdx1 path for the other.
> You don't "get" anything - you are in charge!
I didn't specify that I'm using Udev which automagically creates device
files wherever it's needed
>> What's the difference in
>> this case?I assume they both have that 512Bytes first-sector you were
>> writing about...
> There is nothing in this babble! Either the thing is partitioned or it
> isn't! If it is, then linux will certainly see the partition as YOU
> load the driver for it, as the first sector is usually read by the
> driver at that point. So IF you are running a linux distro that uses
> devfs AND you have devfs mounted and the driver notifies devfs (or udev,
> or whatever) then the driver will register some minor device nodes like
> /dev/sda1 in /dev, as well as the major one, /dev/sda.
Ok.Here's the practical example: I got these two Usb pen drives and I use
them mostly on Linux but they have been FAT formatted with XP.I'd like to
know why I need to mount one of them using the minor device file /dev/sda1
whereas the other one needs to be mounted using /dev/sda
Thank you Peter :-)
- Prev by Date: Re: RH9 obsolete now?
- Next by Date: Re: Variable path of one-partition devices
- Previous by thread: Re: Variable path of one-partition devices
- Next by thread: Re: Variable path of one-partition devices