[PLUG] Partition confusion

Tony Rick tonyr42 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 19 23:19:45 UTC 2007


On 3/19/07, John Jason Jordan <johnxj at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> Figuring that the 1 GB unallocated was just some left over space, I
> moved it back to the Windows 2000 desktop and deleted the second
> partition. Then I brought it back to the laptop, where gparted still
> says there is 1019 MiB unallocated. Gparted is not seeing the remaining
> NTFS partition, and is lying about the unallocated space. However, I
> selected the 1019 MiB and clicked on New, to see what would happen if I
> tried to create a new disk label. Gparted said that a new disk label
> was required in order to create a partition and that setting one would
> delete all data from /dev/sdf. This isn't making any sense to me at
> all. I don't care if gparted and Linux can't see the NTFS partition,
> but how can I get it to recognize the correct free space so I can
> create a partition on it and format it ext3?
>

To libparted (the library for which gparted is a front end), 'disk label'
means
'partition table'.  You were directing it to create a new partition
table, and so to
wipe out all previous partition definitions.  I don't know why gparted is
confused
about what partitions are or are not defined.  Robert suggested 'sudo fdisk
-l /dev/sdf'
to list the partitions.  You could also try 'sudo parted /dev/sdf print' to
see what
libparted thinks of the partition table.  (parted is a cli front end to
libparted, not
otherwise related to gparted, afaik).

- tony



More information about the PLUG mailing list