Subject: Re: filesystem size vs. physical size
From: Jim Cole (greyleaf@yggdrasill.net)
Date: Mon Oct 11 1999 - 19:57:06 MDT
JCS's bits of Mon, 11 Oct 1999 translated to:
> Which kernel are you using? I thought that HFS+ was not yet supported. Is it
> just that an HFS+ (Extended format) partition cannot yet be mounted under
> Linux?
>
> I started by creating two HFS partitions with the Mac Drive Setup utility -
> 4GB for MacOS/boot files and 2GB for Linux. Then using fdisk during the
> install, I created a root partition and a swap partition with the 2GB HFS
> partition. But using HFS for the 4GB Mac partition is very inefficient and I
> would much rather use HFS+. Would I be able to use HFS+ for the 4GB Mac
> partition and BootX?
>
> I am assuming that you use the HFS transfer partition to transfer files
> between MacOS and Linux. Is this right? If I use an HFS+ partition for my
> MacOS then would I need a small HFS partition for file transfer?
I have used 2.2.6 and 2.2.12 with the same partition scheme, so that part
shouldn't matter. The lack of HFS+ support only applies to actually mounting
an HFS+ partition under Linux, not to where you can install your BootX
and kernel files. I have been running all of that from the HFS+ partition
I use for MacOS since I first installed the system. The only thing I use
my old HFS partition for is moving files between MacOS and Linux.
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Tue Nov 02 1999 - 16:20:58 MST