[parted-devel] > 63 heads. Why does this keep coming up?

[Phillip Susi]

I assume you didn't mean to take this off list?  Adding the list back to Cc.

On 02/28/2011 06:02 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
> What I meant was that the macro, as it exists now, doesn't do anything
> with the action. It looks like that was changed with commit
> 562e0007840f06f475b43bb81ffe81b238b627b5 which notes that PED_ASSERT
> shouldn't be used if you don't want it to exit.

So the argument is being phased out?  Then rather than silently ignore 
it, I think a review should be done and the second argument either 
dropped, or the calling code be rewritten to not use PED_ASSERT.  Having 
the vestigial argument there only leads to confusion and bugs.

> I don't think they're garbage. fdisk works with them just fine. I think
> there's a bug in the way parted tries to determine the CHS in some edge
> cases. I don't know what these are, and I don't think it actually
> matters -- it should be just fine to return 0 in these cases.

Does fdisk try to guess geometry like this?  I didn't think it does, or 
if it does, then it falls back to sane defaults when the guess fails.  I 
didn't check the math in any specific metadata to see if it was a corner 
case that the code does not handle correctly, but whether there is a bug 
or not, you really can't rely on the CHS values and so shouldn't be 
bailing out if they turn out to be bogus.