ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (08/10/89)
I'm setting up an 80 meg Apple drive on a IIcx at work. I have a Jasmine at home and I like the partioning software which comes with it: mounting and unmounting, password-protected true partitions, etc. I looked at HD Setup from Apple, which came with the IIcx, but it doesn't seem to do this. Is there anyway to get it to do it? Or would the Jasmine stuff work with an Apple drive? (I kinda doubt it). Robert ****** ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu ***************************** generic disclaimer: all my opinions are mine
barry@primerd.prime.com (09/08/89)
My son is about to get a Mac SE/30 with a 40MB drive for use at school.
He wants to be able to create a primary parition, e.g. 35MB, and a .
secondary parition, e.g. 5MB. He wants to be able to password protect
the secondary partition so he can use it to store personal files. Is
partitioning the best way to address this problem? The partitioning
described by Apple in the utilities manual doesn't appear to do what he
wants (only the primary partition is mountable, other partitions are
reserved for non-System software such as AUX). Is there some public
domain or inexpensive partitioning software that would do what he wants?
I've seen postings for a number of file/folder password utilities -
would any of these be suitable instead of partitioning?
Thanks in advance for any help
Barry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Wolman | barry@s66.prime.com
Principal Technical Consultant | 492 Old Connecticut Path
Prime Computer | Framingham, MA 01701
| 508/626-1700, ext. 4187
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing in this posting reflects an official position of Prime Computer.bernard@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Bernie Bernstein) (09/08/89)
In article <160700059@primerd> barry@primerd.prime.com writes: > >My son is about to get a Mac SE/30 with a 40MB drive for use at school. >He wants to be able to create a primary parition, e.g. 35MB, and a . >secondary parition, e.g. 5MB. He wants to be able to password protect >the secondary partition so he can use it to store personal files. Is >partitioning the best way to address this problem? ... I use Symantec Utilities for the Mac (SUM). It has HD Partition which will encript a partition with password protection. I use it to store my personal data so that other people can use my machine without accessing my checkbook, letters, etc. I think this package is a good investment for anyone with a disk drive. The shield init has saved me several times. I haven't upgraded to SUM II yet, but I suppose I'll do it when I get the chance. o, ,, , | Bernie Bernstein | , ,, L>O/ \,/ \ ,| University of Colorado at boulder |/ \,,/ \ O./ ' / . `, / | office: (303) 492-1218 | / ` \ ,. ,/ / , ' | email: bernard@boulder.colorado.edu | / '' \
c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU (Alex Lau) (09/09/89)
I might get flamed for this, but there is no approved way of
getting partitions in the Mac OS. Apple hasn't rewritten the
part of the Finder that deals with volumes ever since they
wrote HFS.
Some partitioning methods are less dangerous than others;
SUM is one of the more dangerous, while SilverLining or
MultiDisk are a couple of the least dangerous...
--- Alex
UUCP: {att,backbones}!ucbvax!franny!c8s-an
INTERNET: c8s-an%franny.berkeley.edu@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
FIDONET: Alex.Lau@bmug.fidonet.org (1:161/444)barry@primerd.prime.com (09/10/89)
Since posting this query I've received several recommendations for SUM, several for Silverlining, and one for the FWB partition package. Thanks for the help. Barry
ianf@nada.kth.se (Ian Feldman) (09/10/89)
In article <17003@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Alex Lau) writes: > >Some partitioning methods are less dangerous than others; >SUM is one of the more dangerous, while SilverLining or >MultiDisk are a couple of the least dangerous... What you're talking about are merely pseudo-partitions, ie invisible certain-number-of-continuous-segments-on-a-hard-drive files that are faily uncomplicated as far as the MacOS is concerned. I agree with you, however, that they are dangerous to tamper with, especially these that use encryption of the data inside it as the method of protection. In such cases the chances of recovering data from an otherwise undamaged partition on a crashed drive are equal=to NIL. Therefore one should never use encryption-protected partitions, pseude or not, unless there is some kind of satisfactory daily/ periodic backup. I am no advocate of SUM either but why should the SilverLining's or the MultiDisk-solution be a less-dangerous one? -- You just survived another load of gross exaggerations from Ian Feldman, the ASCII hacker ianf@nada.kth.se / ianf@sekth.bitnet ianf%nada.kth.se@uunet.uu.net / uunet!nada.kth.se!ianf
ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) (09/10/89)
> I might get flamed for this, but there is no approved way of > getting partitions in the Mac OS. Apple hasn't rewritten the > part of the Finder that deals with volumes ever since they > wrote HFS. So? The Finder has nothing to do with partitioning. What is considered to be a disk drive by the Finder ( and everything else ) is determined by what the various disk drivers choose to stick in the drive queue and post disk insertion events for. If disk driver X sticks 4 entries in the drive queue, the Finder has no way of knowing that these are for 4 different parts of the same disk. They are 4 disks to the Finder. > > Some partitioning methods are less dangerous than others; > SUM is one of the more dangerous, while SilverLining or > MultiDisk are a couple of the least dangerous... > > --- Alex What do you see as dangerous about these various systems? Do you consider AppleShare to be dangerous? How about having multiple AppleShare volumes mounted? Tim Smith
c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU (Alex Lau) (09/12/89)
> I am no advocate of SUM either but why should the SilverLining's or >the MultiDisk-solution be a less-dangerous one? Because SilverLining and MultiDisk try to write the partitions into the disk driver, as "true" SCSI partitions. The problem, of course, lies in the Finder, not in SilverLining or MultiDisk. So when the Finder gets re-written, those two should be the "best" way to partition. I still don't like any partitioning, personally. I've seen it mess up too many drives. --- Alex UUCP: {att,backbones}!ucbvax!franny!c8s-an INTERNET: c8s-an%franny.berkeley.edu@ucbvax.berkeley.edu FIDONET: Alex.Lau@bmug.fidonet.org (1:161/444)
ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (09/12/89)
In article <17078@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU (Alex Lau) writes... [...] >I still don't like any partitioning, personally. I've seen it mess up >too many drives. How does it mess them up? Cause them to crash more frequently? I'm curious in particular since I have a partitioned Jasmine. Robert ------ ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu ----------------------------- generic disclaimer: all my opinions are mine
c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU (Alex Lau) (09/12/89)
In article <5366@tank.uchicago.edu> ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes: >In article <17078@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU (Alex Lau) writes... >[...] >>I still don't like any partitioning, personally. I've seen it mess up >>too many drives. > >How does it mess them up? Cause them to crash more frequently? I'm curious in >particular since I have a partitioned Jasmine. > >Robert >------ >ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu >----------------------------- >generic disclaimer: all my opinions are mine Sigh... partitioning almost destroys any chances of recovering lost data. Partitioning with encryption REALLY destroys just about ALL chances of recovering after a nasty crash. When people come to me/Steve and ask if we can help them out, we can only sigh and say, you shouldn't have partitioned your drive. If anyone knows of a way to recover such things, let me know. --- Alex UUCP: {att,backbones}!ucbvax!franny!c8s-an INTERNET: c8s-an%franny.berkeley.edu@ucbvax.berkeley.edu FIDONET: Alex.Lau@bmug.fidonet.org (1:161/444)
kaufman@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Marc T. Kaufman) (09/13/89)
In article <17093@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Alex Lau) writes: >When people come to me/Steve and ask if we can help them out, we >can only sigh and say, you shouldn't have partitioned your drive. >If anyone knows of a way to recover such things, let me know. Well, I have had no problem recovering a single partition on a 4 partition disk (SuperMac) using the SUM utilities. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu)
davidl@intelob.intel.com (David Levine) (09/13/89)
In article <17093@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU (Alex Lau) writes:
Sigh... partitioning almost destroys any chances of recovering
lost data. Partitioning with encryption REALLY destroys just about
ALL chances of recovering after a nasty crash.
It depends on what kind of partitioning you're talking about. From
the symptoms you describe, and the term "partitioning with
encryption," I surmise that you are talking about SUM's
"partitioning." SUM "partitions" are just giant disk files, and,
indeed, if the disk crashes they are gone for good. I think that
another program (MultiDisk, was it?) uses this kind of fake
"partitioning," but I haven't seen that one for sale in a year or
more.
On the other hand, true SCSI partitions are no more difficult to
recover than actual disks. LaCie's SilverLining creates true SCSI
partitions, and I THINK that Jasmine's DriveWare does as well. I've
had no problems recovering trashed partitions on my LaCie drive. As
far as MacZap (SUM) is concerned, each partition is a separate disk.
How can you tell real SCSI partitioning from fake SUM-style
"partitioning"? Well, if the partitioning software can also do a
low-level format of the drive, and especially if you MUST reformat the
drive to create or resize partitions, you can be pretty sure that it's
real SCSI partitioning. If the partitioning software insists on
having a lot of contiguous space on the disk to create a partition,
that's a good clue (but not definite) that it's fake "partitioning."
By the way, I recommend SUM as a disk-recovery tool ONLY. If you use
any other part of SUM, you're setting yourself up for disappointment
at best and data loss at worst.
Another flame provoker from
David D. Levine BBBBBBBBB IIII IIII NNN NNNN TM
Senior Technical Writer BBBB BBBB iiii iiii NNNN NNNN
BBBBBBBBB IIII IIII NNNNNNNNN
UUCP: ...[!uunet]!tektronix!biin!davidl BBBB BBBB IIII IIII NNNN NNNN
MX-Internet: <davidl@intelob.intel.com> BBBBBBBBB IIII IIII NNNN NNN
ARPA: <@iwarp.intel.com:davidl@intelob.intel.com>
These are my opinions only and do not reflect those of my employer.jpm@cs.hut.fi (Jussi-Pekka Mantere) (06/21/90)
In article <3809@optilink.UUCP>, jones@optilink (Marvin Jones) writes: >In article <Jun.18.08.50.47.1990.4043@galaxy.rutgers.edu>, apowell@andromeda.rutgers.edu.rutgers.edu (Arthur B. Powell) writes: >> >> What partitioning software should I obtain for my purposes? [ get Silverlining ] >It's hard to find reviews, etc., on Silverlining, as it is not distributed >through normal channels. Only available directly from LaCie, for $99 or so. Well, just a few days ago I received Silverlining from ComputerWare, and at least I consider CW to be "normal channels"... Sorry, don't have the CW price for it :-(, but it's sure worth the $99 :-) Chape