[parted-devel] problem about function partition_print

[Wang Dong]

@Hendrik:  Thanks for your nice explanation. I really appreciate it.

@Phil:  You can also find my reply.

On 02/01/2017 06:10 PM, Hendrik Brueckner wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 02:33:33PM -0500, Phil Susi wrote:
>> On 8/17/2016 11:04 PM, Wang Dong wrote:
>>> I found the partition_print in do_print is not implemented.
>>> And I read the doc and a example is presented. I try to implement it,
>>> but I can not figure out the meaning of some data.
>>> I wonder if some one can give me some clue about this.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> (parted)print 1
>>> Minor: 1
>>> Flags: boot, lba
>>> File System: fat32
>>> Size:            945.000Mb (0%)
>>> Minimum size:     84.361Mb (0%)
>>> Maximum size:   2445.679Mb (100%)
>>>
>>> What does this Minimum size and Maximum size mean respectively?
>>>
>>> I guess the Maximum size is the capacity of this device, but what about the
>>>
>>> Minimum size? And the percent number?
>> I'm very confused by your question.  You apparently made those fields up
>> ( since right now, parted prints nothing when you ask it to print a
>> partition number ), so why are you asking us what they mean?
> The "print <num>" (partition_print() in parted.c) is not implemented.
> However, Wang, found the following example in the parted.texi file:
>
> 	(parted) @kbd{print}
> 	Disk geometry for /dev/hda: 0.000-2445.679 megabytes
> 	Disk label type: msdos
> 	Minor    Start       End     Type      Filesystem  Flags
> 	1          0.031    945.000  primary   fat32       boot, lba
> 	2        945.000   2358.562  primary   ext2
> 	3       2358.562   2445.187  primary   linux-swap
> 	(parted) @kbd{print 1}
> 	Minor: 1
> 	Flags: boot, lba
> 	File System: fat32
> 	Size:            945.000Mb (0%)
> 	Minimum size:     84.361Mb (0%)
> 	Maximum size:   2445.679Mb (100%)
>
> So the question of Wang relates to the example and what actually the fields
> mean.  The maximum size seems to the size of the entire device.  The minimum
> size looks something strange, at least, it is difficult to derive them from
> the values above.
>
> Because it is just an example, it could simply be that the example is not
> correct or misleading, of course, it is not implemented.  So the next question
> might be what should "print 1" actually display?
>
> Thanks and kind regards,
>    Hendrik

-- 
Best regards. Wang Dong