Talk:Fdisk

Remove tedious details on about OS/2 partitioning?
Just as all the overwhelming HOW-TO details about the use of MS-DOS's FDISK (added by unknow user 69.177.103.53 on 14 JAN 2007) were removed by Admin. User:RexNL, I see no reason to keep all these details about OS/2 UNIX/Linux; which is arguably running on a very small percentage of computers today. Any comments before we revert back? to a short discussion of OS/2 partitioning ? Daniel B. Sedory 08:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * As it turns out, the detailed notes mentioned above had nothing to do with OS/2 at all... they were for the UNIX/Linux 'fdisk ' program; for which all the details can be found in a number of the external links cited here. Therefore the material has been removed, since it would be more appropriate for an e-BOOK on the subject, but not an article. Daniel B. Sedory 09:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Solution: UNIX fdisk examples in new article
Having recently read the article on Dd_(Unix), I propose placing a well-defined link under the section, UNIX, Linux and derived fdisks, to their own article: fdisk_(Unix). Unless someone has some deep concerns about this (and gets authorization to remove it), I'm going to create that new article very soon. I do not, however, know if doing so requires this present article to have a 'disambiguous' tag or not. Daniel B. Sedory 22:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Many broken links here!
Many of the external links here are 'dead' or malformed (see the very first link!), so any help fixing these would be appreciated. Daniel B. Sedory 09:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

FreeDOS FDISK
Can someone post an image of the FreeDOS FDISK to replace the copyrighted Microsoft screenshot? --Jtalledo (talk) 15:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Why remove reference to VMware's 'partedUtil'
Dear Wtshymanski, Can you please explain why, given the article already references similar Unix based partition editing utilities, you felt it necessary to revert my edit that mentioned VMware's 'parteduUtil'?

Given the same 'divergence' from the core topic, why don't you go ahead and edit out all the references to similar Unix tools?

On those grounds, I have reverted the edit. If you feel it belongs under 'Unix-like tools', please feel free to move it there.

Meaning of Fife (talk) 23:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)


 * The sentence you added is:
 * You didn't say whether this tool creates real partitions or virtual partitions, and whether the partitions it creates are FDISK-compatible or not. You added a red link to libparted without explaining what that is. And you provide no references or any context to explain why this is relevant. I assume the Unix-like tools are actually called "fdisk", while this tool—partedUtil—is not. The article is not a "survey of partitioning tools". Perhaps your edit would be better received in the List of disk partitioning software article. Wbm1058 (talk) 00:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You didn't say whether this tool creates real partitions or virtual partitions, and whether the partitions it creates are FDISK-compatible or not. You added a red link to libparted without explaining what that is. And you provide no references or any context to explain why this is relevant. I assume the Unix-like tools are actually called "fdisk", while this tool—partedUtil—is not. The article is not a "survey of partitioning tools". Perhaps your edit would be better received in the List of disk partitioning software article. Wbm1058 (talk) 00:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. Basically, there are three problems with your edits:
 * First, you are disregarding WP:BRD, reinstating your reverted change without reaching a consensus. You risk starting an edit war.
 * Second, this article is about fdisk and your sentence is not about fdisk.
 * Third, synthesis of published sources is not allowed in Wikipedia.


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 08:03, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

linux-fdisk writing things behind MBR
Right now i suspect fdisk (util-linux 2.20.1) writing stuff behind the MBR (but not necessarily after the beginning of the first partition). I'm sure this happend while i only changed the partition type from 7 to 83, while bootflag set(unchanged). Manpage only says fdisk "does fuzzy things" (and strangely recommends not to use itself ..). --Itu (talk) 16:38, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * After "fuzzing around" with fdisk very often I cannot appriove that. (typos above fixed)--Mideal (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Linux
The main focus of the article should be shifted to *nix (as fdisk is replaced for Windows in the meantime). Additionally, sfdisk, cfdisk and gdisk/sgdisk (for GPT partition tables) should be mentioned - there is already a redirection from gdisk but it not mentioned!--Mideal (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with this. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out why I was being redirected to fdisk when I wanted to read about gdisk. Information about gdisk should be added soon. Joel M.  Chat ✐  00:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

"Xfdisk" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Xfdisk. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 13 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)