Jump to content

Talk:GUID Partition Table

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2601:143:480:a4c0:a483:d2b5:4a76:c6d5 (talk) at 23:48, 4 May 2021 (→corrections). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconComputing: Software C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

New version created by Scorpiuss

I've created a new version of the GPT page. The fundamentals are all there. Could use a chart of the things represented at each bit position. Microsoft's got a nice one on the external link indicated (which, by the way, is a great source).

-Scorpiuss, Aug 26 2005, 13:25 GMT

EFI System partition GUID contradiction

The GUID for an EFISys partition under the Partition Entries section is different than the one in the list of GUIDs. On the MS page linked at the bottom, the one given in the Partition Entries section is given.

-Scorpiuss

Error in GPT disk layout figure

I have been trying to understand the GPT disk layout. From reading the UEFI spec and other pages, my impression is that the secondary (alternate) GPT header is located in the last addressable block on the disk. However, the figure (GUID Partition Table Scheme) is not consistent. The caption says that -1 is the last addressable block, but following the same graphical logic as used at the top of the figure the figure indicates that the secondary GPT header starts at -2 and ends at -1, i.e., it indicates that that the secondary GPT header is located at the second addressable block from the end, which should be wrong.

Am I right in this? Who has made the figure and how can we modify it?

this is indeed misleading. the backup GPT header is in the very last LBA. nothing follows it. The figure must be fixed. I'll see if I can fix it. --Crackwitz (talk) 20:10, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I meditated on this briefly. The alignment of the text relative to the dashed lines can be misleading. It was probably intended to be relative to blocks. "LBA-1" is beside the last block. It's not meant to label the dashed line. --Crackwitz (talk) 20:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I made some edits: https://gist.github.com/crackwitz/e492e43cbf28d4a3877fe6108f99e6fa (vertically aligned the labels, added/removed some labels, removed some dividers) If anyone knows how to replace/overwrite a file in here, feel free to do it.--Crackwitz (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, had to go to Wikimedia Commons to find the feature. It's done.--Crackwitz (talk) 20:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Limitations vs MBR

I was wondering if perhaps this talk topic title should be an included section in the article? I know that "technically" GPT does not have any of the limitations that MBR does, but in certain instances a GPT-partitioned disk is not feasible. For example, some built-in Windows (7 thru 10) backup features do not support GPT disks. I can't quite remember for sure, but I seem to recall running into issues with restoring from a Win7 system image which was located on a GPT disk. I believe File History also does not support GPT disks. Just wondering what everyone's thoughts/experiences are.. thanks. -Jchap1590 (talk) 10:29, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

no one has anything to say, for or against, about this being mentioned in the article? -Jchap1590 (talk) 21:23, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

corrections

macOS does NOT support GPT: that is, it doesn't support any other OS on the integral drive (which is the purpose of GPT from the consumer's standpoint).

Win10 installer refuses to install on a GPT drive: Microsoft does NOT support GPT however it can read/write to them during runtime. Win10 does NOT support GPT.

Redhat Oracle installers do NOT support GPT unless to hoard it. I installed FreeBSD which insists on using GPT (my intuition said use 4-OS old way on my 1TB HD, but it was not allowed). I then tried intalling RH as a 2nd OS: the installer could not automatically or manually install, saying freeBSD was "where it wanted to be, it could not make room to install boot files". (instead of proceeding to install the HD image without boot, it simply refuses to anything but stall my time and insist on being the sole owner of the drive)

I SEE ABSOLUTELY 0 IMPOROVEMENT using GPT having EFI in my system as a consumer. I now cannot bithack my way into installing because installers "smartly prevent installation" ... which they seem to do whenever a competitor's system has already installed, demanding to be the first and only installed IMHO.

The "easily 4, always 4" partition scheme of the past never failed until modern installers began refusing to install if they must use it - yet also they are incapable of using the GPT they claim has "saved the end user": which they know is a big FAT lie.

You can say GPT has 0 todo with EFI or UEFI, but really it does because a GPT without any booting is not a possibility. You do have to boot. And it isn't really, as I said, booting USB that's the problem it is that installers refuse to install. Which? Win10, Redhat, Apple, FreeBSD, all conditionally where the other installed first.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:GUID_Partition_Table&oldid=1021483470"