Re: Install Fails w/Non-Partitioned Disk

["Wes Bauske" <wsb paralleldata com>]

Dan O'Reilly wrote:
> 
> At 06:04 PM 6/10/99 -0500, Wes Bauske wrote:
> >Dan O'Reilly wrote:
> >>
> >> I've discovered after much trial and error, that a Redhat (5.2 or 6.0)
> >> install fails if I attempt to install it on a system that has at least
> >> one disk in it that doesn't have a PC-style partition table on it.
> >>
> >
> >Don't think so. My XP1000 has ONLY BSD style labels and
> >installed RH5.2 and RH6.0 just fine. Exactly what sort
> >of partition table do VMS disks have??
> 
> They don't.  To VMS, a disk is one huge "partition", if you will; but
> the idea of a "partition" doesn't exist in VMS (save for some special
> device drivers).  If you have a 2.1gb disk, you have 2.1gb of storage
> in one logical device.  There's no partition table like many other systems
> use.
> 

OK. Maybe that's the issue vs just non-PC partitioning.
I would think fdisk would just ignore the disk though. 
Don't use VMS so I don't know. Maybe Jay will know more.


Wes