From: M.L. on


>David W. Hodgins schrieb:
>
>> Keep in mind, that what you/windows call a drive, is properly
>> called a partition, which then contains a filesystem.
>>
>> In order to access the drive, the appropriate controller module
>> must be loaded, This will be a sata, or ide module, for the
>> internal drive controller, and the usb_storage module for
>> drives (hard or flash) accessed by the usb controller.
>
>Your view is a bit inconsistent. Physical drives require an according
>driver, independent from their contained partitions and file systems.
>Mountable file systems are not limited to a single partition, they can
>span multiple partitions or even physical drives. I dunno about Linux
>terminology, but from the user's VP the Windows distinction between
>physical and logical drives makes more sense. The partition term
>includes unmountable (e.g. extended) partitions, and should be
>understood only as a subdivision of an single physical drive, regardless
>of the ability to mount a partition as a filesystem.
>
>DoDi

For some reason I didn't get Dave Hodgins reply on my newsreader and
had to go to Google to find his reply.

Perhaps I need to add that the C and D partitions are on the same IDE
physical hard drive, formatted as NTFS. I don't see how Hodgins'
explanation accounted for the fact that one of the partitions on the
same hard drive was fully browsable while the other was not, even
though they are using the same drive controller. Nor does it explain
why the C: drive is partially browsable. It also doesn't explain why
YLMF Linux couldn't browse the optical drive containing its own live
CD.

Thanks DoDi and Dave, but I'll stick with Puppy Linux until I can get
this mystery solved.