From: robin_listas@es.invalid   
      
   On 2023-04-03 21:34, bad sector wrote:   
   > On 4/3/23 14:24, Carlos E.R. wrote:   
   >> On 2023-04-03 12:52, bad sector wrote:   
   >>> On 3/22/23 07:42, Carlos E.R. wrote:   
   >>>> On 2023-03-22 12:01, bad sector wrote:   
   >>>>> On 3/21/23 23:55, Malcolm wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 21:23:40 -0400   
   >>>>>> bad sector  wrote:   
   >>>>>>    
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> But none of this is getting me any closer to getting a handle on the   
   >>>>>>> difference between 1 & 3 in the OP, or on the need to use the system   
   >>>>>>> partition as a "Boot Partition" when there already is a definitive   
   >>>>>>> "BIOS Boot" partition. I figure a little more verbose help   
   >>>>>>> bubbles on   
   >>>>>>> that dialog would be useful.   
   >>>>>> Hi   
   >>>>>> BIOS Boot (type pmbr_boot) is need when using Legacy Boot and a gpt   
   >>>>>> disk.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I do have a GPT disk and having no need for EFI I do use legacy boot   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Yes, you do need it.   
   >>>   
   >>> The BIOS-Boot yes, not that other horror   
   >>   
   >> Man, it doesn't harm to have an empty 500 MB partition there.   
   >   
   > Probably entirely futile given the current state of the art but I was   
   > tought early on not to leave any place on a disk that doesn't carry the   
   > risk of of a defrag storm or similar hiding-place destruction by   
   > overwrite. Since the diskware never allocates bad sectors anyway, this   
   > used to mean not leaving any space that is not formatted and somehow   
   > (=unpredictably) in use.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> You actually need the "Bios Boot" partition, usually of 8 MiB size,   
   >>>> because you are using legacy boot.   
   >>>   
   >>> While in the disk root world, would Truncated-MBR not be a much   
   >>> better name for Protected-MBR? In fact Truncated-Root-Sector would be   
   >>> even better seeing that MBR doesn't say much but Root-Sector does.   
   >>   
   >> It is not truncated. You are free to use it fully, but you can cause   
   >> disasters.   
   >>   
   >> It is not protected-mbr, but protective-mbr.   
   >   
   > I don't really know what MBR is (seeing that that acronym doesn't even   
   > hint at any physical description) but unlesss I missed something the   
   > once exclusive root sector (a very definitive physical descriptor) is no   
   > longer entirely reserved for booting so only a part of it may used for   
   > that. To me that means truncated in use at least if not physically.   
      
   Well, wrong interpretation.   
      
   The MBR on a GPT partitioned disk is fully there, same as before, and   
   can not be used for something else.   
      
   A machine with traditional BIOS, using Linux, will boot from it, but   
   ignore its partition definitions it might have (it may warn about it).   
      
   A machine using UEFI will ignore it totally (but should complain if its   
   contents are incorrect).   
      
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> And YaST will also insist, with good reasons, despite your   
   >>>> protestations, that you need an ESP partition, which you call EFI   
   >>>> partition (it is "EFI system partition, that is, ESP). Just let YaST   
   >>>> create it. It is quite small, and if you actually need it next   
   >>>> decade and don't have it, you will grind your teeth.   
   >>>   
   >>> Next decade I might well be grinding and not just my teeth anyway :-)   
   >>>   
   >>> I use fdisk of gfdisk or whatever to partition my disks because I   
   >>> want partitions to be exactly sized with identical block numbers so   
   >>> that (if needed) one system can be just dd'd to another partition.   
   >>> Gui partitioners have a very long way to go to get me aboard   
   >>> especially if their *microcancer-coefficient* leans heavily toward   
   >>> the 'virtualise everything and keep the user in the mushromm factory   
   >>> by keeping him in the dark and feeding him manure'.   
   >>   
   >> That doesn't contradict what I said in the least.   
   >   
   > I would never want to contradict you because for one thing I have no use   
   > for it but the last time I 'looked at' one of them GUI partitioners   
   > (probably 20+ years ago) it did not cater to defining starting and   
   > ending blocks. Maybe I should 'take another look' but I don't have any   
   > use for that either :-)   
      
   I'm not saying any of that. Use whatever tool you wish, create the   
   partitions specifying exact amount of LBAs and you can clone them just fine.   
      
   I'm saying that YaST will want an ESP partition and/or a "Bios Boot"   
   partition. I say "do not interfere". Let those partitions be, do not   
   complain.   
      
      
   --   
   Cheers, Carlos.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)