1 |
On 05/02 09:49, Andrea Conti wrote: |
2 |
> > I think, I feel better if I repartitioning/reformat both drives, |
3 |
> > though. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> It's not necessary, but if it makes you feel better by all means do so. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> > *GPT/MBR |
8 |
> > From a discussion based on a "GPT or MBR for my system drive" in |
9 |
> > conjunction with UEFI it was said, that GPT is more modern and |
10 |
> > save. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> |
13 |
> More modern I concur. For the rest it's mainly about features: >2TB partitions and way more metadata, plus not having to bother with CHS values which make no sense in today's drives. |
14 |
> And being able to define >4 partitions without littering the disk with extended boot records, which is probably the only thing I'd call "safer". |
15 |
> |
16 |
> My point was that none of this is relevant in an external drive which is under 1TB and will only hold a single partition starting at sector 1 and spanning the rest of the disk. |
17 |
> A system drive, especially if booting from UEFI is a different case for which GPT absolutely makes sense. |
18 |
> |
19 |
|
20 |
Ok, the other way around: Does GPT hurt more than MBT on a external HD |
21 |
used for backup puporses (no boot), has 1T and 1 partion of that size? |
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
> > My question was meant not so much as "MBR or GPT?" |
25 |
> > but more whether there are some variants of GPT (with |
26 |
> > protected MBR for example -- which was completly new to me), |
27 |
> > which I should use or avoid. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> There are really no "variants" of GPT. The protective MBR is only there to make all space in the disk look allocated to MBR partitioning tools that are not GPT-aware, and is automatically written for you by all GPT partitioning tools. |
30 |
> |
31 |
> In addition to the opaque entry of type 0xee, this MBR can also contain entries pointing to at least some of the actual partitions; this is called a 'hybrid' MBR and allows MBR-only access to partitions that are within the limits of MBR addressing (start and end sector <2TB). These are only useful in very specific cases an I would consider them a hack more than a solution; while gpt-fdisk has some support for creating hybrid MBRs (don't know about fdisk), you won't get one unless you specifically ask for it. |
32 |
>: |
33 |
|
34 |
Thanks of the information! :) |
35 |
|
36 |
> > But: Are rescue systems for USB-stick more UEFI/GPT aware nowadays |
37 |
> > or "traditionally" based on MBR/BIOS-boot? |
38 |
> |
39 |
> I think that anything that's not ancient will have tools and kernel support for both MBR and GPT, and will boot fine in both BIOS and UEFI modes. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> > One thing I found is really handy: An USB-stick with an rEfind |
42 |
> > installation. As long as your PC supports UEFI (or can switched to it) |
43 |
> > rEfind is able to boot "everything" without prior configuration. |
44 |
> |
45 |
> You can probably do the same with GRUB2, albeit in a way less user-friendly fashion :) |
46 |
> But why do you consider the ability to boot anything but the rescue system itself important in a rescue system? |
47 |
|
48 |
Recently a BIOS update deleted all UEFI entries and the system no |
49 |
longer boots. With rEfind from a USBstick I was able to boot |
50 |
the sustem nonetheless and the reinstallation of grub solves |
51 |
the problem. |
52 |
Task accomplished! :) |
53 |
|
54 |
> > |
55 |
> > Some rescue-system which really shines and with which you have made good |
56 |
> > experiences? |
57 |
> |
58 |
> My usual go-to is SystemRescueCD (the old 5.x gentoo-based one). |
59 |
> |
60 |
> andrea |
61 |
|
62 |
Thanks for the info, Andrea! |
63 |
|
64 |
Cheers! |
65 |
Meino |