subject:"New Hard Disk"

Re: lvm2 on top of dm-crypt - how to add new hard disk

2013-08-21 Thread Gregory Nowak

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:19:40PM -0300, Luther Blissett wrote:
> My initial guess was that it should be possible to extend this
> encryption scheme to the new hard disk using standard lvm tools and the
> unencrypted "open" disk as physical volume to the already existing
> volume group. However, after some research the nearest I got was someone
> who added the disk while creating a new volume group:
> 
> http://earlruby.org/2010/02/adding-an-external-encrypted-drive-with-lvm-to-ubuntu-linux/comment-page-1/
> 
> and this arch wiki saying I should better have the reverse: luks on lvm.
> 
> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Encrypted_LVM#Spanned.2FMultiple_Disks
> 
> But it does not state it is impossible, it just says that it requires
> modifying the "encrypted hook". Also, it's clear that once this is done,

Yes, you could do what you're after if you had luks on lvm. If there
is a way for luks to span multiple disks, I'm not aware of it. The
best suggestion I can think of is to simply set the new drive up as a
physical volume, and put new volume groups on it. You can mount
volumes from the second drive to wherever you need more space in the
original drive. If that's not possible, you should be able to move
logical volumes from the first drive to the second drive to make room
on the first drive.

> if one disk fails, the system will be unbootable.

Another reason to just put a new volume group or groups on the new
drive instead of extending the existing group or groups if that is possible.

> 
> So my question is: have anyone here ever done that? How to I tell init
> to unlock both disks before mapping lvm?

If you're asking how to decrypt a luks volume in place, I know of such
a way. If you're asking how encrypted volumes are opened during boot,
have a look at the crypttab(5) man page.

Greg

-- 
web site: http://www.gregn..net
gpg public key: http://www.gregn..net/pubkey.asc
skype: gregn1
(authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)

--
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-mana...@eu.org

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130822005808.ga22...@gregn.net

lvm2 on top of dm-crypt - how to add new hard disk

2013-08-21 Thread Luther Blissett

Hello folks,

So I might better ask before attempting something stupid. I need to add
a new hard drive to an encrypted debian box. The encryption scheme was
set using debian installer defaults which resulted in just /dev/sda1
-> /boot outside block device encryption. Everything else is encrypted
and lvm is used instead of ordinary partitions.

My initial guess was that it should be possible to extend this
encryption scheme to the new hard disk using standard lvm tools and the
unencrypted "open" disk as physical volume to the already existing
volume group. However, after some research the nearest I got was someone
who added the disk while creating a new volume group:

http://earlruby.org/2010/02/adding-an-external-encrypted-drive-with-lvm-to-ubuntu-linux/comment-page-1/

and this arch wiki saying I should better have the reverse: luks on lvm.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Encrypted_LVM#Spanned.2FMultiple_Disks

But it does not state it is impossible, it just says that it requires
modifying the "encrypted hook". Also, it's clear that once this is done,
if one disk fails, the system will be unbootable.

So my question is: have anyone here ever done that? How to I tell init
to unlock both disks before mapping lvm?

--
André N. Batista
GNUPG/PGP KEY: 6722CF80

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1377098380.18481.22.camel@tagesuhu-pc

lvm2 on top of dm-crypt - how to add new hard disk

2013-08-21 Thread Luther Blissett

Hello folks,

So I might better ask before attempting something stupid. I need to add
a new hard drive to an encrypted debian box. The encryption scheme was
set using debian installer defaults which resulted in just /dev/sda1
-> /boot outside block device encryption. Everything else is encrypted
and lvm is used instead of ordinary partitions.

My initial guess was that it should be possible to extend this
encryption scheme to the new hard disk using standard lvm tools and the
unencrypted "open" disk as physical volume to the already existing
volume group. However, after some research the nearest I got was someone
who added the disk while creating a new volume group:

http://earlruby.org/2010/02/adding-an-external-encrypted-drive-with-lvm-to-ubuntu-linux/comment-page-1/

and this arch wiki saying I should better have the reverse: luks on lvm.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Encrypted_LVM#Spanned.2FMultiple_Disks

But it does not state it is impossible, it just says that it requires
modifying the "encrypted hook". Also, it's clear that once this is done,
if one disk fails, the system will be unbootable.

So my question is: have anyone here ever done that? How to I tell init
to unlock both disks before mapping lvm?





-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1377098415.18481.23.camel@tagesuhu-pc

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-20 Thread Tom H

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Huang, Tao  wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Tom H  wrote:
> [snip]
>> mdadm assembles an array according to data in the superblock so it
>> shouldn't matter whether the kernel recognizes sda and sdb as sdb and
>> sda respectively should you plug them in differently.
>
> so they's recognized with data in the superblock,
> that even uuid doesn't matter?

UUIDs are held in superblocks.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimnsbxvxjuu4lerzkledis0oe470dtpu4y2y...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-18 Thread Rob Owens

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 09:08:41PM +0800, Huang, Tao wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Michal  wrote:
> > This is a better way then disconnecting the drive and checking which
> > drive was disconnected like I did, but I would still put a very easy to
> > read label on the drive to say /dev/sdX. It would be far easier then
> > checking a long serial number, especially if it's hard to read and you'd
> > need to take each HDD out to check :)
> 
> I think the allocating of /dev/sdX depends on the order you plug the
> drives into the machine.
> so it changes over reconfiguring of the hardwares, which makes your
> labels useless.
> 
> can someone confirm this?
> 
I had something like this happen on a Lenny amd64 system.  The drive
identifications (/dev/sdX) switched after I performed a kernel upgrade.
If I booted the old kernel, they were back to normal.  That's when I
learned about UUID's...

-Rob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100618192626.ga10...@aurora.owens.net

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-18 Thread Huang, Tao

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Tom H  wrote:
[snip]
> mdadm assembles an array according to data in the superblock so it
> shouldn't matter whether the kernel recognizes sda and sdb as sdb and
> sda respectively should you plug them in differently.

so they's recognized with data in the superblock,
that even uuid doesn't matter?


Tao
--
http://huangtao.me/
http://www.google.com/profiles/UniIsland


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimfqhxqdjrq5ljcwwfwtltwsb6ak_ydd2bzf...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-18 Thread Michal

>> But how can this be correct when each raid partion is linked to the
>> HDD/Partions
>>
>>
>> # cat /proc/mdstat
>> Personalities : [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
>> md3 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdb2[1]
>>  716796096 blocks [2/2] [UU]
>>
>> md2 : active raid1 sda5[0] sdb5[1]
>>  51199040 blocks [2/2] [UU]
>>
>> md0 : active raid1 sda1[0] sdb1[1]
>>  513984 blocks [2/2] [UU]
>>
>> md1 : active raid1 sda3[0] sdb3[1]
>>  102398208 blocks [2/2] [UU]
> 
> mdadm assembles an array according to data in the superblock so it
> shouldn't matter whether the kernel recognizes sda and sdb as sdb and
> sda respectively should you plug them in differently.
> 
> 

A good point. Noted


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c1b44c2.8010...@ionic.co.uk

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-18 Thread Tom H

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Michal  wrote:
> On 17/06/2010 14:08, Huang, Tao wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Michal  wrote:
>>> This is a better way then disconnecting the drive and checking which
>>> drive was disconnected like I did, but I would still put a very easy to
>>> read label on the drive to say /dev/sdX. It would be far easier then
>>> checking a long serial number, especially if it's hard to read and you'd
>>> need to take each HDD out to check :)
>>
>> I think the allocating of /dev/sdX depends on the order you plug the
>> drives into the machine.
>> so it changes over reconfiguring of the hardwares, which makes your
>> labels useless.
>>
>> can someone confirm this?
>>
>>
>> Tao
>>
>>
>
> But how can this be correct when each raid partion is linked to the
> HDD/Partions
>
>
> # cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
> md3 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdb2[1]
>      716796096 blocks [2/2] [UU]
>
> md2 : active raid1 sda5[0] sdb5[1]
>      51199040 blocks [2/2] [UU]
>
> md0 : active raid1 sda1[0] sdb1[1]
>      513984 blocks [2/2] [UU]
>
> md1 : active raid1 sda3[0] sdb3[1]
>      102398208 blocks [2/2] [UU]

mdadm assembles an array according to data in the superblock so it
shouldn't matter whether the kernel recognizes sda and sdb as sdb and
sda respectively should you plug them in differently.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikynxk1ht0m-1azgipknzqvoyi-od2sxixth...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-18 Thread Michal

On 17/06/2010 14:08, Huang, Tao wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Michal  wrote:
>> This is a better way then disconnecting the drive and checking which
>> drive was disconnected like I did, but I would still put a very easy to
>> read label on the drive to say /dev/sdX. It would be far easier then
>> checking a long serial number, especially if it's hard to read and you'd
>> need to take each HDD out to check :)
> 
> I think the allocating of /dev/sdX depends on the order you plug the
> drives into the machine.
> so it changes over reconfiguring of the hardwares, which makes your
> labels useless.
> 
> can someone confirm this?
> 
> 
> Tao
> 
> 

But how can this be correct when each raid partion is linked to the
HDD/Partions


# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md3 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdb2[1]
  716796096 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md2 : active raid1 sda5[0] sdb5[1]
  51199040 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md0 : active raid1 sda1[0] sdb1[1]
  513984 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md1 : active raid1 sda3[0] sdb3[1]
  102398208 blocks [2/2] [UU]

unused devices: 


for example?


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c1b2e06.5060...@ionic.co.uk

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-17 Thread Huang, Tao

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Michal  wrote:
> This is a better way then disconnecting the drive and checking which
> drive was disconnected like I did, but I would still put a very easy to
> read label on the drive to say /dev/sdX. It would be far easier then
> checking a long serial number, especially if it's hard to read and you'd
> need to take each HDD out to check :)

I think the allocating of /dev/sdX depends on the order you plug the
drives into the machine.
so it changes over reconfiguring of the hardwares, which makes your
labels useless.

can someone confirm this?


Tao


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimc8j0kf165dwkqryugtckavjopycu3agoea...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-17 Thread martin f krafft

also sprach Michal  [2010.06.17.1017 +0200]:
> This is a better way then disconnecting the drive and checking which
> drive was disconnected like I did, but I would still put a very easy to
> read label on the drive to say /dev/sdX. It would be far easier then
> checking a long serial number, especially if it's hard to read and you'd
> need to take each HDD out to check :)

Instead, I suggest you stop using /dev/sdX everywhere and only use
/dev/disk/by-id/*. And/or file a bug against the kernel to request
that /proc/mdstat should list the ID.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft   Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer   http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
logik ist analsadismus: gedanken werden gewaltsam
durch einen engen gang gepreßt.
-- frei nach lacan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100617115801.gd25...@fishbowl.rw.madduck.net

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-17 Thread Steven


On Thu, June 17, 2010 10:17, Michal wrote:
> On 16/06/2010 19:00, Håkon Alstadheim wrote:
>> Just do "ls -l /dev/disk/by-id/". The disks will have factory labels
>> with serial-numbers to match.
>>
>
> This is a better way then disconnecting the drive and checking which
> drive was disconnected like I did, but I would still put a very easy to
> read label on the drive to say /dev/sdX. It would be far easier then
> checking a long serial number, especially if it's hard to read and you'd
> need to take each HDD out to check :)
>
Excellent, thank you both, this seems like the fastest/best way.
Backups and RAID is one thing, but they're both useless if you can't
recover :)

Kind regards,
Steven

PS. I hope I fixed the duplicate mail issue now.


-- 
Rarely do people communicate; they just take turns talking.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/1366.194.7.9.50.1276768902.squir...@stevenleeuw.kwik.to

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-17 Thread Michal

On 16/06/2010 19:00, Håkon Alstadheim wrote:
> Steven skrev:
>> How to identify which drive has failed in an array?
>>
>> I have 6 disks, 4 are used in raid (mdadm), the other 2 contain /boot, /
>> and /home.
>> /dev/sdc
>> /dev/sdd
>> /dev/sde
>> /dev/sdf
>> Each have 1 partition.
>> /dev/md0 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1
>> /dev/md1 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sde1 and /dev/sdf1
>>
>> If a drive fails, how do I know which drive? This is a desktop system,
>> not
>> a server.
>>
>>   
> 
> Just do "ls -l /dev/disk/by-id/". The disks will have factory labels
> with serial-numbers to match.
> 

This is a better way then disconnecting the drive and checking which
drive was disconnected like I did, but I would still put a very easy to
read label on the drive to say /dev/sdX. It would be far easier then
checking a long serial number, especially if it's hard to read and you'd
need to take each HDD out to check :)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c19da2d.1090...@ionic.co.uk

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-17 Thread Steven


On Wed, June 16, 2010 17:30, Michal wrote:
>
> Sorry I really didnt explain my self propely;
>
> Yes I mean /dev/sde and by lable I mean get a lable machine (or
> somehting similar) to put a physical lable on the drive, like a sticker
> with text saying /dev/sde
>
> I did this in one machine and simply built my RAID1 array across two
> drives, disconnected a drive, booted back up check mdstat to see which
> one was now disconnected and labled that one, then labled the second
> one. It's not a brilliant way I will admit but it works perfectly well.
> I tested it 3 times (connecting the drive back, rebuild array,
> disconnecting the other drive etc) to really make sure I had labled them
> correctly.
>
Ah, now I get it, I had no idea how to know which drive to put the right
label on.

Thanks.


-- 
Rarely do people communicate; they just take turns talking.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/10287.91.183.48.98.1276758573.squir...@stevenleeuw.kwik.to

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-17 Thread Steven


On Wed, June 16, 2010 17:30, Michal wrote:
>
> Sorry I really didnt explain my self propely;
>
> Yes I mean /dev/sde and by lable I mean get a lable machine (or
> somehting similar) to put a physical lable on the drive, like a sticker
> with text saying /dev/sde
>
> I did this in one machine and simply built my RAID1 array across two
> drives, disconnected a drive, booted back up check mdstat to see which
> one was now disconnected and labled that one, then labled the second
> one. It's not a brilliant way I will admit but it works perfectly well.
> I tested it 3 times (connecting the drive back, rebuild array,
> disconnecting the other drive etc) to really make sure I had labled them
> correctly.
>
Ah, now I get it, I had no idea how to know which drive to put the right
label on.

Thanks.


-- 
Rarely do people communicate; they just take turns talking.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/10288.91.183.48.98.1276758593.squir...@stevenleeuw.kwik.to

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Håkon Alstadheim


Steven skrev:

How to identify which drive has failed in an array?

I have 6 disks, 4 are used in raid (mdadm), the other 2 contain /boot, /
and /home.
/dev/sdc
/dev/sdd
/dev/sde
/dev/sdf
Each have 1 partition.
/dev/md0 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1
/dev/md1 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sde1 and /dev/sdf1

If a drive fails, how do I know which drive? This is a desktop system, not
a server.

  


Just do "ls -l /dev/disk/by-id/". The disks will have factory labels 
with serial-numbers to match.


--
Håkon Alstadheim / N-7510 Skatval / email:ha...@alstadheim.priv.no
tlf: 74 82 60 27 mob: 47 35 39 38
http://alstadheim.priv.no/hakon/ 
spamtrap: finnesi...@alstadheim.priv.no -- 1 hit & you are out




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c191159.8080...@alstadheim.priv.no

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Bob Weber

 Use smartctl from the smartmontools package.  If mdadm says that /dev/sdc (or 
cat /proc/mdstat) is at fault then use "smartctl -a /dev/sdc" and it will print 
out all kinds of info on the drive including its serial number which should be 
on a sticker on the case of the drive.


The programs included with smartmontools might have warned you of an impending 
failure.  I have a smart self long test run om my drives 2 times a week.


*...Bob*

On 06/16/2010 09:32 AM, Steven wrote:

On Wed, June 16, 2010 13:13, Siju George wrote:

Hope some one finds this helpful :-)

--Siju

Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault.
=


Thanks, this might prove useful.
However I do have a question... which might be just as important.

How to identify which drive has failed in an array?

I have 6 disks, 4 are used in raid (mdadm), the other 2 contain /boot, /
and /home.
/dev/sdc
/dev/sdd
/dev/sde
/dev/sdf
Each have 1 partition.
/dev/md0 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1
/dev/md1 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sde1 and /dev/sdf1

If a drive fails, how do I know which drive? This is a desktop system, not
a server.

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Michal

On 16/06/2010 15:50, Steven wrote:
> 
> On Wed, June 16, 2010 15:47, Michal wrote:
>>
>> One way is to label the disks themselves so you simply do;
>>
>> cat /proc/mdstat which might say /dev/sd3 is down. Open the case, look
>> for the disk labled /dev/sde and replace it. If you have LED's like
>> servers have (probably not) they can be a fiddle to get working but it's
>> possible
>>
> No LED's for drives, it already has them for every pci slot,
> looks like a Christmas tree :)
> 
> I think you meant /dev/sde instead of sd3, right? If not, please correct me.
> If I'm not mistaken, mdadm will report the broken drive,
> then I have to look for the drive that corresponds to the 4th sata slot on
> the motherboard.
> That's part of my issue, can I be sure that the drive connected to port 4
> is /dev/sde?
> It's not a problem for the other 2 drives, as they differ in capacity,
> but these 4 are exactly the same size.
> 
> Also how accurate is mdadm in identifying the failed drive?
> As there are only 2 in an array, there is only 1 copy of the data to
> compare to.
> 
> It also seems my last message was sent twice, sorry about that.
> 

Sorry I really didnt explain my self propely;

Yes I mean /dev/sde and by lable I mean get a lable machine (or
somehting similar) to put a physical lable on the drive, like a sticker
with text saying /dev/sde

I did this in one machine and simply built my RAID1 array across two
drives, disconnected a drive, booted back up check mdstat to see which
one was now disconnected and labled that one, then labled the second
one. It's not a brilliant way I will admit but it works perfectly well.
I tested it 3 times (connecting the drive back, rebuild array,
disconnecting the other drive etc) to really make sure I had labled them
correctly.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c18ee14.6060...@ionic.co.uk

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Steven

On Wed, June 16, 2010 15:47, Michal wrote:
>
> One way is to label the disks themselves so you simply do;
>
> cat /proc/mdstat which might say /dev/sd3 is down. Open the case, look
> for the disk labled /dev/sde and replace it. If you have LED's like
> servers have (probably not) they can be a fiddle to get working but it's
> possible
>
No LED's for drives, it already has them for every pci slot,
looks like a Christmas tree :)

I think you meant /dev/sde instead of sd3, right? If not, please correct me.
If I'm not mistaken, mdadm will report the broken drive,
then I have to look for the drive that corresponds to the 4th sata slot on
the motherboard.
That's part of my issue, can I be sure that the drive connected to port 4
is /dev/sde?
It's not a problem for the other 2 drives, as they differ in capacity,
but these 4 are exactly the same size.

Also how accurate is mdadm in identifying the failed drive?
As there are only 2 in an array, there is only 1 copy of the data to
compare to.

It also seems my last message was sent twice, sorry about that.

-- 
Rarely do people communicate; they just take turns talking.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/23813.91.183.48.98.1276699820.squir...@stevenleeuw.kwik.to

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Steven

On Wed, June 16, 2010 13:13, Siju George wrote:
> Hope some one finds this helpful :-)
>
> --Siju
>
> Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault.
> =
>

Thanks, this might prove useful.
However I do have a question... which might be just as important.

How to identify which drive has failed in an array?

I have 6 disks, 4 are used in raid (mdadm), the other 2 contain /boot, /
and /home.
/dev/sdc
/dev/sdd
/dev/sde
/dev/sdf
Each have 1 partition.
/dev/md0 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1
/dev/md1 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sde1 and /dev/sdf1

If a drive fails, how do I know which drive? This is a desktop system, not
a server.

-- 
Rarely do people communicate; they just take turns talking.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/23451.91.183.48.98.1276695152.squir...@stevenleeuw.kwik.to

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Michal


> 
> Thanks, this might prove useful.
> However I do have a question... which might be just as important.
> 
> How to identify which drive has failed in an array?
> 
> I have 6 disks, 4 are used in raid (mdadm), the other 2 contain /boot, /
> and /home.
> /dev/sdc
> /dev/sdd
> /dev/sde
> /dev/sdf
> Each have 1 partition.
> /dev/md0 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1
> /dev/md1 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sde1 and /dev/sdf1
> 
> If a drive fails, how do I know which drive? This is a desktop system, not
> a server.
> 

One way is to label the disks themselves so you simply do;

cat /proc/mdstat which might say /dev/sd3 is down. Open the case, look
for the disk labled /dev/sde and replace it. If you have LED's like
servers have (probably not) they can be a fiddle to get working but it's
possible


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c18d5fb.2000...@ionic.co.uk

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Steven

On Wed, June 16, 2010 13:13, Siju George wrote:
> Hope some one finds this helpful :-)
>
> --Siju
>
> Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault.
> =
>

Thanks, this might prove useful.
However I do have a question... which might be just as important.

How to identify which drive has failed in an array?

I have 6 disks, 4 are used in raid (mdadm), the other 2 contain /boot, /
and /home.
/dev/sdc
/dev/sdd
/dev/sde
/dev/sdf
Each have 1 partition.
/dev/md0 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1
/dev/md1 (raid 1) consists of /dev/sde1 and /dev/sdf1

If a drive fails, how do I know which drive? This is a desktop system, not
a server.

-- 
Rarely do people communicate; they just take turns talking.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/23452.91.183.48.98.1276695172.squir...@stevenleeuw.kwik.to

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread martin f krafft

also sprach Siju George  [2010.06.16.1402 +0200]:
> > "Manually" is for Mac users. ;)
> 
> these days every one has left windows and are picking on Mac ? :-)

"Reinstalling" is for Windows users.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft   Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer   http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
the reason the mainstream is thought of as a stream
is because it is so shallow.


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Siju George

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:06 PM, martin f krafft  wrote:
> also sprach Siju George  [2010.06.16.1322 +0200]:
>> > sfdisk -d /dev/sda | sfdisk /dev/sdb
>>
>> oh thanks :-)
>>
>> I did it manually using fdisk
>
> "Manually" is for Mac users. ;)
>

these days every one has left windows and are picking on Mac ? :-)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimgxdr683grsg4piso_pivu6pjwjkaspjgsm...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread martin f krafft

also sprach Siju George  [2010.06.16.1322 +0200]:
> > sfdisk -d /dev/sda | sfdisk /dev/sdb
> 
> oh thanks :-)
> 
> I did it manually using fdisk

"Manually" is for Mac users. ;)

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft   Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer   http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
work like you don't need the money
love like you have never been hurt
dance like there's nobody watching


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Siju George

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:48 PM, martin f krafft  wrote:
> also sprach Siju George  [2010.06.16.1313 +0200]:
>> 2) Create identical partitions on the new disk using 'fdisk'.
>
> sfdisk -d /dev/sda | sfdisk /dev/sdb
>

oh thanks :-)

I did it manually using fdisk

--Siju


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktilgnr-wlrnoqkmxlpyou0ep_vb-h3vlm4o6g...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread martin f krafft

also sprach Siju George  [2010.06.16.1313 +0200]:
> 2) Create identical partitions on the new disk using 'fdisk'.

sfdisk -d /dev/sda | sfdisk /dev/sdb

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft   Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer   http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
"i always choose my friends for their good looks and my enemies for
 their good intellects. man cannot be too careful in his choice of
 enemies."
  -- oscar wilde


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20100616111821.gb5...@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net

Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault - Howto with screen shots

2010-06-16 Thread Siju George

Hope some one finds this helpful :-)

--Siju

Rebuilding RAID 1 Array in Linux with a new hard disk after a disk fault.
=

** Actual screen shot from terminal of steps taken during rebuild on
10-June-2010 on Debian Lenny ( Linux )**


1) Check the partitions layout on the current hard disk



srv1:~# fdisk /dev/sda

The number of cylinders for this disk is set to 60801.
There is nothing wrong with that, but this is larger than 1024,
and could in certain setups cause problems with:
1) software that runs at boot time (e.g., old versions of LILO)
2) booting and partitioning software from other OSs
   (e.g., DOS FDISK, OS/2 FDISK)

Command (m for help): p

Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xdd6e

   Device Boot  Start End  Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sda1   1 122  979933+  fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sda2 1231338 9767520   fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sda313392554 9767520   fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sda42555   60801   467869027+  fd  Linux raid autodetect

Command (m for help):  quit

srv1:~#



2) Create identical partitions on the new disk using 'fdisk'.



Partition Id should be 'fd' for all RAID partitions. The resulting
layout should look like.

srv1:~# fdisk /dev/sdb

The number of cylinders for this disk is set to 60801.
There is nothing wrong with that, but this is larger than 1024,
and could in certain setups cause problems with:
1) software that runs at boot time (e.g., old versions of LILO)
2) booting and partitioning software from other OSs
   (e.g., DOS FDISK, OS/2 FDISK)

Command (m for help): p

Disk /dev/sdb: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe3a3a447

   Device Boot  Start End  Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sdb1   1 122  979933+  fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sdb2 1231338 9767520   fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sdb313392554 9767520   fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sdb42555   60801   467869027+  fd  Linux raid autodetect

Command (m for help): q

srv1:~#



3) Check the current RAID status

srv1:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md3 : active raid1 sda4[1]
  467868928 blocks [2/1] [_U]

md2 : active raid1 sda3[1]
  9767424 blocks [2/1] [_U]

md1 : active raid1 sda2[1]
  9767424 blocks [2/1] [_U]

md0 : active raid1 sda1[1]
  979840 blocks [2/1] [_U]

unused devices:
srv1:~#

4) Rebuild the arrays and check thr status

srv1:~# mdadm -a /dev/md0 /dev/sdb1
mdadm: added /dev/sdb1
srv1:~# mdadm -a /dev/md1 /dev/sdb2
mdadm: added /dev/sdb2
srv1:~# mdadm -a /dev/md2 /dev/sdb3
mdadm: added /dev/sdb3

srv1:~# mdadm -a /dev/md3 /dev/sdb4
mdadm: added /dev/sdb4

srv1:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md3 : active raid1 sdb4[2] sda4[1]
  467868928 blocks [2/1] [_U]
  [>]  recovery =  0.0% (285440/467868928)
finish=54.5min speed=142720K/sec

md2 : active raid1 sdb3[0] sda3[1]
  9767424 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md1 : active raid1 sdb2[0] sda2[1]
  9767424 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md0 : active raid1 sdb1[0] sda1[1]
  979840 blocks [2/2] [UU]

unused devices:
srv1:~#

5) Install grub on the MBR of new hard disk

srv1:~# grub-install /dev/sdb
Searching for GRUB installation directory ... found: /boot/grub
Installation finished. No error reported.
This is the contents of the device map /boot/grub/device.map.
Check if this is correct or not. If any of the lines is incorrect,
fix it and re-run the script `grub-install'.

(hd0)   /dev/sda
(hd1)   /dev/sdb
srv1:~#


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinfezni1ezq0vkdo4ryhh7uolrugaaje9_l1...@mail.gmail.com

Re: partitioning a new hard disk

2010-05-27 Thread roberto

On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 3:27 AM, Ron Johnson  wrote:
>
> Which is the "real" XP partition, sda2 or sda5?
>
> If nothing's on sda5, then that should be more than enough for a laptop
> install.
>
it seems i am not an Xp expert anymore ...

i totally missed that the VAIO_ (aka D:) partition is totally empty :)

i'll place squeeze there
-- 
roberto


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktilcqlc1zrdtqnmsfha12zmy3nfeg2arljvdq...@mail.gmail.com

Re: partitioning a new hard disk

2010-05-21 Thread Mark

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:38 AM, roberto  wrote:

> hello,
> a friend gave me a laptop (sony vaio) where i want to install debian
> squeeze (in dual boot);
>
> [snip]

>
> how would you repartitionate the disk, since i have to leave a certain
> amount of space for Xp for other users ?
> i thought about installing debian next to the VAIO_ partition and then
> use the other partition VAIO for read and write
>

What I do in dual boot situations (starting from center of hdd working
towards the outside) is have 20 GB for XP, 20 GB for Debian (2 GB of that is
swap space), then a fat32 partition for the remainder of the disk called
"storage" or something similar, that gets mounted in XP as E: drive for
example, and in Debian by editing /etc/fstab.  I choose fat32 becuase of
it's native read/write support in Windows and Debian - ntfs could work
though with ntfs-3g.  You can use jkdefraggui (freeware) in XP to move all
files to the start of the partition before re-sizing so the re-partitioning
doesn't mess up XP.  It's worked for me several times when adding Debian to
an XP-only drive.

Just my thoughts, take or leave as you wish.  Good luck either way.

Mark

Re: partitioning a new hard disk

2010-05-21 Thread Ron Johnson


On 05/21/2010 01:38 PM, roberto wrote:

hello,
a friend gave me a laptop (sony vaio) where i want to install debian
squeeze (in dual boot);
actually the disk is partitioned as follows (output from mount
command, #'s are my comments):

# total 82.25 GB 82.25 free, extended partition, ntfs
/dev/sda2 on /media/VAIO type fuseblk
(rw,nosuid,nodev,allow_other,default_permissions,blksize=4096)

# total 93.14 GB, 60.35 free, primary partition, ntfs
/dev/sda5 on /media/VAIO_ type fuseblk
(rw,nosuid,nodev,allow_other,default_permissions,blksize=4096)


how would you repartitionate the disk, since i have to leave a certain
amount of space for Xp for other users ?
i thought about installing debian next to the VAIO_ partition and then
use the other partition VAIO for read and write



Which is the "real" XP partition, sda2 or sda5?

If nothing's on sda5, then that should be more than enough for a 
laptop install.


--
Dissent is patriotic, remember?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4bf73318.1070...@cox.net

Re: partitioning a new hard disk

2010-05-21 Thread Andrei Popescu

On Fri,21.May.10, 22:26:12, roberto wrote:
 
> actually, fdisk -l does not output nothing
> 
> i also tried to issue
> fdisk /dev/sda
> and it prints
> "unable to open /dev/sda"
> 
> i am using an ubuntu live cd

Try

sudo fdisk -l

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: partitioning a new hard disk

2010-05-21 Thread roberto

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Camaleón  wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2010 20:38:53 +0200, roberto wrote:
>
>> hello,
>> a friend gave me a laptop (sony vaio) where i want to install debian
>> squeeze (in dual boot);
>> actually the disk is partitioned as follows (output from mount command,
>> #'s are my comments):
>
> (...)
>
> Better than "mount" issue "fdisk -l" and put the output.
>

actually, fdisk -l does not output nothing

i also tried to issue
fdisk /dev/sda
and it prints
"unable to open /dev/sda"

i am using an ubuntu live cd

-- 
roberto


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinqhbkp2w7cj3r-ra1mp1gsvey4hboyvfywp...@mail.gmail.com

Re: partitioning a new hard disk

2010-05-21 Thread Camaleón

On Fri, 21 May 2010 20:38:53 +0200, roberto wrote:

> hello,
> a friend gave me a laptop (sony vaio) where i want to install debian
> squeeze (in dual boot);
> actually the disk is partitioned as follows (output from mount command,
> #'s are my comments):

(...)

Better than "mount" issue "fdisk -l" and put the output.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2010.05.21.18.47...@gmail.com

partitioning a new hard disk

2010-05-21 Thread roberto

hello,
a friend gave me a laptop (sony vaio) where i want to install debian
squeeze (in dual boot);
actually the disk is partitioned as follows (output from mount
command, #'s are my comments):

# total 82.25 GB 82.25 free, extended partition, ntfs
/dev/sda2 on /media/VAIO type fuseblk
(rw,nosuid,nodev,allow_other,default_permissions,blksize=4096)

# total 93.14 GB, 60.35 free, primary partition, ntfs
/dev/sda5 on /media/VAIO_ type fuseblk
(rw,nosuid,nodev,allow_other,default_permissions,blksize=4096)


how would you repartitionate the disk, since i have to leave a certain
amount of space for Xp for other users ?
i thought about installing debian next to the VAIO_ partition and then
use the other partition VAIO for read and write

thank you in advance
-- 
roberto


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktilxfks-uvrmwcsx3jdstwe5tt5bimjtjm5j-...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Mounting new hard disk in /dev/sdb

2009-12-19 Thread Steven Jones


Hi,

Use the label function in fstab

regards

Steven

Johannes Wiedersich wrote:

Jason Filippou wrote:
  

I recently installed a new SATA hard drive on my desktop system and I
noticed that Squeeze had, by default, mounted it in /dev/sda. This means
that recently, due to the popular GRUB failure that caused everybody
(including myself) a lot of grief, my Debian disk rescue mode was installing
the new GRUB on (hd0), which was, however, on the brand new disk (NTFS
formatted), which does not hold and will not hold any operating systems.
Thus, I was still seeing grub_printf_ as missing when I logged in. So I was
just wondering whether there was any way that I could plug in my new hard
drive and mount it on /dev/sdb, so that I can access it as (hd1) in GRUB
notation, next time the boot loader fails (which, I have to say, has been
reather frequent lately).



FWIW, you don't mount a disk on /dev/sdb. You mount it on whatever
directory you assign to it wihtin the / (root) file system. /dev/sdb is
the 'name' assigned to the *dev*ice by the kernel. In order to work
around some arbitraryness in this assignment due to disks present or not
on boot and/or different boot processes, you should mount by id or by
label.

I can't help you with the grub issues. (FWIW, lenny's grub works fine
for me.) You could try to switch cables or try to configure your bios to
access both disks in a specified, reproducible order.

HTH,

Re: Mounting new hard disk in /dev/sdb

2009-12-19 Thread Glenn English

> >On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Jason Filippou  
> >wrote:
> >So I was
> > just wondering whether there was any way that I could plug in my new hard
> > drive and mount it on /dev/sdb

Careful!

Define "new hard drive". What appears where in /dev is a function of your BIOS, 
the kernel, and udev.

If it's IDE, ATA, or ATAPI it shows up as a /dev/hd. And those seem to be 
nicely mapped to IDE controller number / master / slave. 

Unless it's serial-ATA, of course, in which case it's a /dev/sd :-/ 

All SCSI, SATA, and USB are a /dev/sd -- which sd depends on what your BIOS 
sees first at boot. My (Dell) servers look at the USB ports first, so a USB 
stick becomes /dev/sda. Then it looks for SATA, and finally SCSI. The Sun box 
looks at SCSI first...

So when my grub config said to load / off /dev/sda (Debian lenny installer 
default), and I accidentally left a USB stick in one of the ports, the machine 
wouldn't boot. I don't remember if (hd0) was hosed as well.

Oh. And the /dev directory is created by udev these days. It can name things 
anything it wants.

It's much more repeatable to specify the filesystem's UUID (vol_id /dev/sd??) 
instead of the device node. In both grub's config and in fstab.

I've never tried it, but I don't think you can mount anything on /dev/sdb -- 
that's a device node, not a filesystem node. But you can mount /dev/sdb on 
/mnt...

-- 
Glenn English
g...@slsware.com

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Mounting new hard disk in /dev/sdb

2009-12-19 Thread Mark

>On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Jason Filippou 
>wrote:
>So I was
> just wondering whether there was any way that I could plug in my new hard
> drive and mount it on /dev/sdb
If it's an internal hdd, all you need do is edit /etc/fstab to mount
/dev/sda to a directory of your choice automatically every time the computer
boots.

Mark

Re: Mounting new hard disk in /dev/sdb

2009-12-19 Thread Johannes Wiedersich

Jason Filippou wrote:
> I recently installed a new SATA hard drive on my desktop system and I
> noticed that Squeeze had, by default, mounted it in /dev/sda. This means
> that recently, due to the popular GRUB failure that caused everybody
> (including myself) a lot of grief, my Debian disk rescue mode was installing
> the new GRUB on (hd0), which was, however, on the brand new disk (NTFS
> formatted), which does not hold and will not hold any operating systems.
> Thus, I was still seeing grub_printf_ as missing when I logged in. So I was
> just wondering whether there was any way that I could plug in my new hard
> drive and mount it on /dev/sdb, so that I can access it as (hd1) in GRUB
> notation, next time the boot loader fails (which, I have to say, has been
> reather frequent lately).

FWIW, you don't mount a disk on /dev/sdb. You mount it on whatever
directory you assign to it wihtin the / (root) file system. /dev/sdb is
the 'name' assigned to the *dev*ice by the kernel. In order to work
around some arbitraryness in this assignment due to disks present or not
on boot and/or different boot processes, you should mount by id or by
label.

I can't help you with the grub issues. (FWIW, lenny's grub works fine
for me.) You could try to switch cables or try to configure your bios to
access both disks in a specified, reproducible order.

HTH,
-- 
Johannes

Three nations have not officially adopted the International System
of Units as their primary or sole system of measurement: Burma,
Liberia, and the United States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_units

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Mounting new hard disk in /dev/sdb

2009-12-19 Thread Jason Filippou

Hello,

I recently installed a new SATA hard drive on my desktop system and I
noticed that Squeeze had, by default, mounted it in /dev/sda. This means
that recently, due to the popular GRUB failure that caused everybody
(including myself) a lot of grief, my Debian disk rescue mode was installing
the new GRUB on (hd0), which was, however, on the brand new disk (NTFS
formatted), which does not hold and will not hold any operating systems.
Thus, I was still seeing grub_printf_ as missing when I logged in. So I was
just wondering whether there was any way that I could plug in my new hard
drive and mount it on /dev/sdb, so that I can access it as (hd1) in GRUB
notation, next time the boot loader fails (which, I have to say, has been
reather frequent lately).

Thanks,

Jason

Re: Can't mount a newly created ext3 partition from the new Hard Disk I installed...

2005-12-22 Thread Mike McCarty


Dom wrote:

On 12/22/05, Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


[snip]


I'm saying that I have run mkfs only now and it mounts.

Thanks really on that, it's simply me not knowing...


Everybody's ignorant, just about different things.
Will Rogers

Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Can't mount a newly created ext3 partition from the new Hard Disk I installed...

2005-12-22 Thread Dom

On 12/22/05, Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dom wrote:
> > On 12/22/05, Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>What file system? I don't see where you ran mkfs.
> >>
> >>All you've got is a blank partition.
> >>
> >>Mike
> >
> >
> > Thanks Mike! I've done it.
>
> Are you saying that you have now run mkfs and it mounts?
>
> If so, then congratulations!
>
> Or are you saying that you just omitted to mention that you
> already ran mkfs, but it doesn't mount?
>
> If so, then I'm as mystified as you are.

I'm saying that I have run mkfs only now and it mounts.

Thanks really on that, it's simply me not knowing...

Dom

Re: Can't mount a newly created ext3 partition from the new Hard Disk I installed...

2005-12-22 Thread Stephen Cormier

On Thursday 22 December 2005 16:39, Dom wrote:
> I bought a Western Digital 80GB Hard Disk as a second disk for my
> GNU/Linux Debian system (kernel 2.6.8-2-386).
>
> I attached it as a Slave and set its jumper accordingly. The next
> step was to create partition, and I created one by running (under
> root of course) 'fdisk /dev/hdb' and using the command new (n) to
> create a primary partition with partition number 1 for which I only
> used 12GB (of 80GB available). Also with command 't' I made sure the
> filesystem is ext3 (code 83).
>
> I created a directory /music on which I plan to mount this
> filesystem.

> and this is what I get when I enter "dmesg | tail":
>
>
> SCSI subsystem initialized
> VFS: Can't find ext3 filesystem on dev hdb1.
> VFS: Can't find ext3 filesystem on dev hdb1.
>
>
> Please help, I'm new with all of this and I really can't figure out
> what I did wrong nor can I find an adequate solution Googleing the
> web.
>
> Can you see what I'm doing wrong?
>
> Thanks in advance!

I see no mention of you having formatted the partition so.

mkfs.ext3 /dev/hdb1

Stephen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Can't mount a newly created ext3 partition from the new Hard Disk I installed...

2005-12-22 Thread Mike McCarty


Dom wrote:

On 12/22/05, Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


What file system? I don't see where you ran mkfs.

All you've got is a blank partition.

Mike



Thanks Mike! I've done it.


Are you saying that you have now run mkfs and it mounts?

If so, then congratulations!

Or are you saying that you just omitted to mention that you
already ran mkfs, but it doesn't mount?

If so, then I'm as mystified as you are.

Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Can't mount a newly created ext3 partition from the new Hard Disk I installed...

2005-12-22 Thread Dom

On 12/22/05, Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What file system? I don't see where you ran mkfs.
>
> All you've got is a blank partition.
>
> Mike

Thanks Mike! I've done it.

Re: Can't mount a newly created ext3 partition from the new Hard Disk I installed...

2005-12-22 Thread Mike McCarty


Dom wrote:

I bought a Western Digital 80GB Hard Disk as a second disk for my
GNU/Linux Debian system (kernel 2.6.8-2-386).

I attached it as a Slave and set its jumper accordingly. The next step
was to create partition, and I created one by running (under root of
course) 'fdisk /dev/hdb' and using the command new (n) to create a
primary partition with partition number 1 for which I only used 12GB
(of 80GB available). Also with command 't' I made sure the filesystem
is ext3 (code 83).


Nope. You created a partition, not a file system.


I created a directory /music on which I plan to mount this filesystem.

Then I went to change my fstab file which now looks like this:


[snip]


I restarted my system and the filesystem was not mounted. Here's my syslog:


[snip]

What file system? I don't see where you ran mkfs.

All you've got is a blank partition.

Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Can't mount a newly created ext3 partition from the new Hard Disk I installed...

2005-12-22 Thread Dom

I bought a Western Digital 80GB Hard Disk as a second disk for my
GNU/Linux Debian system (kernel 2.6.8-2-386).

I attached it as a Slave and set its jumper accordingly. The next step
was to create partition, and I created one by running (under root of
course) 'fdisk /dev/hdb' and using the command new (n) to create a
primary partition with partition number 1 for which I only used 12GB
(of 80GB available). Also with command 't' I made sure the filesystem
is ext3 (code 83).

I created a directory /music on which I plan to mount this filesystem.

Then I went to change my fstab file which now looks like this:


# /etc/fstab: static file system information.
#
#
proc/proc   procdefaults0   0
/dev/hda1   /   ext3defaults,errors=remount-ro 0   1
/dev/hda2   /localdisk  ext3defaults0   0
/dev/hda5   noneswapsw  0   0
/dev/hdb1   /music  ext3defaults0   0
/dev/hdc/media/cdrom0   udf,iso9660 ro,users,noauto,unhide  0   0
/dev/hdd/media/cdrom1   udf,iso9660 ro,users,noauto,unhide  0   0
/dev/sda/media/usb0 autorw,users,noauto  0   0
/dev/sda1   /media/usb1 vfatrw,users,noauto  0   0
shmfs   /dev/shmshm defaults 0   0


I restarted my system and the filesystem was not mounted. Here's my syslog:


kernel: klogd 1.4.1#17, log source = /proc/kmsg started.
kernel: Inspecting /boot/System.map-2.6.8-2-386
kernel: Loaded 28182 symbols from /boot/System.map-2.6.8-2-386.
kernel: Symbols match kernel version 2.6.8.
kernel: No module symbols loaded - kernel modules not enabled.
kernel: Linux version 2.6.8-2-386 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
(gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-12)) #1 Thu May 19 17:40:50 JST
2005
kernel: BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
kernel:  BIOS-e820:  - 0009fc00 (usable)
kernel:  BIOS-e820: 0009fc00 - 000a (reserved)
kernel:  BIOS-e820: 000f - 0010 (reserved)
kernel:  BIOS-e820: 0010 - 0bffc000 (usable)
kernel:  BIOS-e820: 0bffc000 - 0bfff000 (ACPI data)
kernel:  BIOS-e820: 0bfff000 - 0c00 (ACPI NVS)
kernel:  BIOS-e820:  - 0001 (reserved)
kernel: 191MB LOWMEM available.
kernel: On node 0 totalpages: 49148
kernel:   DMA zone: 4096 pages, LIFO batch:1
kernel:   Normal zone: 45052 pages, LIFO batch:10
kernel:   HighMem zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1
kernel: DMI 2.3 present.
kernel: ACPI disabled because your bios is from 2000 and too old
kernel: You can enable it with acpi=force
kernel: Built 1 zonelists
kernel: Kernel command line: root=/dev/hda1 ro
kernel: Local APIC disabled by BIOS -- reenabling.
kernel: Found and enabled local APIC!
kernel: Initializing CPU#0
kernel: PID hash table entries: 1024 (order 10: 8192 bytes)
kernel: Detected 604.287 MHz processor.
kernel: Using tsc for high-res timesource
kernel: Console: colour VGA+ 80x25
kernel: Dentry cache hash table entries: 32768 (order: 5, 131072 bytes)
kernel: Inode-cache hash table entries: 16384 (order: 4, 65536 bytes)
kernel: Memory: 187500k/196592k available (1336k kernel code, 8468k
reserved, 732k data, 204k init, 0k highmem)
kernel: Checking if this processor honours the WP bit even in
supervisor mode... Ok.
kernel: Calibrating delay loop... 1187.84 BogoMIPS
kernel: Security Scaffold v1.0.0 initialized
kernel: Mount-cache hash table entries: 512 (order: 0, 4096 bytes)
kernel: CPU: After generic identify, caps: 0383fbff   
kernel: CPU: After vendor identify, caps:  0383fbff   
kernel: CPU: L1 I cache: 16K, L1 D cache: 16K
kernel: CPU: L2 cache: 256K
kernel: CPU: After all inits, caps:0383fbff   0040
kernel: CPU: Intel Pentium III (Coppermine) stepping 01
kernel: Enabling fast FPU save and restore... done.
kernel: Enabling unmasked SIMD FPU exception support... done.
kernel: Checking 'hlt' instruction... OK.
kernel: Checking for popad bug... OK.
kernel: enabled ExtINT on CPU#0
kernel: ESR value before enabling vector: 
kernel: ESR value after enabling vector: 
kernel: Using local APIC timer interrupts.
kernel: calibrating APIC timer ...
kernel: . CPU clock speed is 604.0154 MHz.
kernel: . host bus clock speed is 100.0692 MHz.
kernel: checking if image is initramfs...it isn't (ungzip failed);
looks like an initrd
kernel: Freeing initrd memory: 4216k freed
kernel: NET: Registered protocol family 16
kernel: EISA bus registered
kernel: PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xf0890, last bus=1
kernel: PCI: Using configuration type 1
kernel: mtrr: v2.0 (20020519)
kernel: ACPI: Subsystem revision 20040326
kernel: ACPI: Interpreter disabled.
kernel: Linux Plug and Play Support v0.97 (c) Adam Belay
kernel: PnPBIOS: Scanning system for PnP BIOS support...
kernel: PnPBIOS: Found

90 matches

Mail list logo