[SLUG] How to rename partitions
Hello sluggers, if I want to change the name of a drive & partition from say hda1 to sda1, what do I need to do in addition to updating /etc/fstab ? If I just change fstab and try to boot a kernel using libata to access SATA drives, it can't find /dev/sda. thanks Rod -- --- Brought to you by a thunderbird, penguin, gnu and a camel -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] How to rename partitions
Rod Butcher wrote: Hello sluggers, if I want to change the name of a drive & partition from say hda1 to sda1, what do I need to do in addition to updating /etc/fstab ? If I just change fstab and try to boot a kernel using libata to access SATA drives, it can't find /dev/sda. thanks Rod Hi Rod, You can't just "change it" for the sake of changing it. The device name is (for the most part) assigned by the driver that controls that device. Once upon a time, SATA drives fell under the /dev/hd* model. If your kernel has that set of drivers, then you are stuck with /dev/hda, /dev/hda1, etc. I've heard (but not confirmed) the latest 2.6 SATA drivers do live under /dev/sd* instead of /dev/hd*. You'll need to confirm the your kernel actually supports it. Try booting your kernel into single user mode, and looking at dmesg to see how it maps the drives. You might even manage a `fdisk -l` smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] How to rename partitions
>I've heard (but not confirmed) the latest 2.6 > SATA drivers do live under /dev/sd* instead of /dev/hd*. You'll need to > confirm the your kernel actually supports it.> I'm talking about 2.6.8 and up - they default to libata which refers to SATA drives as SCSI and hence sda1 etc. so to load this kernel which wants sda*, on a system built for 2.6.7 i.e. hda*, what do I change apart from fstab ? I can bootup 2.6.10 compiled to inhibit libata, and it accepts hda* fine.. I'm using it as I speak... but this is deprecated. So.. to bootup 2.6.10 using (the recommended) libata, I believe the question is how do I rename my partitions to sda* ? Changing the grub files and fstab didn't work. I've asked this question before but still no luck. man fstab didn't help me.. I'll RTFM if I can find what FM to RT. cheers Rod --- Brought to you by a thunderbird, penguin, gnu and a camel Keith Hopkins wrote: Rod Butcher wrote: Hello sluggers, if I want to change the name of a drive & partition from say hda1 to sda1, what do I need to do in addition to updating /etc/fstab ? If I just change fstab and try to boot a kernel using libata to access SATA drives, it can't find /dev/sda. thanks Rod Hi Rod, You can't just "change it" for the sake of changing it. The device name is (for the most part) assigned by the driver that controls that device. Once upon a time, SATA drives fell under the /dev/hd* model. If your kernel has that set of drivers, then you are stuck with /dev/hda, /dev/hda1, etc. I've heard (but not confirmed) the latest 2.6 SATA drivers do live under /dev/sd* instead of /dev/hd*. You'll need to confirm the your kernel actually supports it. Try booting your kernel into single user mode, and looking at dmesg to see how it maps the drives. You might even manage a `fdisk -l` -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Need help in choosing distro
Hi TongMaster, TongMaster wrote: You can't hold that belief and be experienced in Linux at the same time. The proposition that being experienced or not experience in Linux has linkage to belief or advocacy for one Linux distro or the other is certainly a proposition that is riddled with fallacies. Whilst it is true that some advocates of a Linux Distro are experienced Linux users not all avid Linux Distro advocates are Linux users with Linux experience. Many are in there to advance their business, to win fame, to gain profit, or even just to take up a cause that they can't somewhere else. Whilst I'm not suggesting that their causes for becoming avid Linux Distro advocates are mutually exclusive of Linux experiences, many avid Linux Distro advocates are not Linux experienced at all. On another matter, many experienced Linux users who are extremely successful and who earn their living in the exercise of their knowledge and the practice of their skills are not advocates of any Linux Distro. By extremely succesful I mean materially successful with a some MEGA $$$ in their name, because they are professionals who simply want to get things done and not be bothered by which Linux is better or worse. They are extremely successful professionals because they are inclusive and do not exclude any and all other Distros or even OS in the practice of their professions. Oh, BTW, they are called professionals because they are inclusive and are not bothered by any kind of Distro when asked to get things done. Some Linux distro's are pure crack and ought to never be used. I take exception to this for reasons I set out in the next paragraphs. Some are just as un-manageable as Windows and Solaris *cough*Redhat*cough*. Others adhere to sane package management policies that allow sysadmin's to have a beer after work and not dread being called early for some nonsense. I will use any distro if it suits the job. As a matter of record, I use NCR Towers (Whilst working for NCR, I did all phases of development including programming for Finance Department of a Foreign Country),ATT Unix, Fujitsu Mainframes Unix ( Whilst working for Fujitsu, I did device drivers for MTL systems), Solaries, Fujitsu MidSize UNIX and I will not hesitate to use other OS like MSWindows and IBM systems (I started my computing career as Assembler, Fortran, and Cobol Programmer in 1969) and without making value judgements as I realise the usefulness for using these systems, without these other systems, many systems in this earth at the present moment at least will be lame and incomplete. I generally managed to use any Linux Distro to suit my intended installation. The most common installation I have are Linux-Kernel-Bridge-Firewall ( a few hundreds; using FW-TK in the past and with it the Kernel has to be always re-compiled due to its nature and specs on top of the prescribed Security Policies). FW-TK which stands for FireWall ToolKit, as you are probably aware of, was developed by TIS and the same company that developed Gaunlet, a heavy duty Firewall popularly marketed on Soralies Platform at that time. BTW, what do you do for a living ? When one inspects that installation many will not even be able to identity what Distro I have started with, in which case any Linux Distro suits my objectives. For this installation, I have used distros such as Yggdrasill, Slackware, Mandrake, RedHat, and now Fedora. After each working day, I found plenty of time to drink beer and wine with family and friends, without in "dread being called early for some nonsense". As you can see, I'm no advocate of any Linux Distro. I like them all would not hesitate to promote them. ===CUT==CUT== I'm yet to encounter any opinions in SLUG that came from anywhere other than experience so I would not begin to doubt their sincerity, regardless of what distro they promoted or what crack it may seem they were smoking. Your're probably right, but how else ? And I'm just pleased I drink beer and wine, and not smoking tobacco or crack. Have a good night. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] How to rename partitions
Rod Butcher wrote: Hello sluggers, if I want to change the name of a drive & partition from say hda1 to sda1, what do I need to do in addition to updating /etc/fstab ? If I just change fstab and try to boot a kernel using libata to access SATA drives, it can't find /dev/sda. thanks The device name is dictated by the device driver used for your drive. If you are able to boot at all, check the output of your #dmesg before you modify your /etc/fstab. What device name the kernel has used to recognise your drive ? -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Mepis - The good, The Bad and the...
I have a 10 gig Mandrake partition, used perhaps 4 gig of it. I wanted to create a directory on it and call it say "mepis-usr" then make it the /usr directory, or make a subdirectory call "usr" to be /usr when I boot up Mepis. Mandrake won't bother with it. I don't want to create another partition really, or is this the only way to do it ? Chris - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 1:28 AM Subject: Re: [SLUG] Mepis - The good, The Bad and the... Martin wrote: $quoted_author = "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ; mkfs the new partition mount the new partition take system down to single-user mode "cp -a /usr /new/usr/partition" umount the new filesystem "mv /usr /oldusr" update /etc/fstab mount new filesystem under /usr take system back to multi-user mode make sure everything is ok (possibly - backup /oldusr) rm -rf /oldusr to free this disk space doing it that way can be painful if you need something in /usr/lib or /usr/local/lib after you try to move /usr out of the way to create the new mountpoint. What would you possibly need from there while in single-user mode? There are about 2-3 commands which are done without /usr here, and /bin is supposed to provide everything you'll need before mounting /usr. i'd be inclined to boot from a live cd (knoppix, ubuntu etc.etc.) and then operate on the disk using the tools you have on the cd. That's a possibility too, but sounds like a hassle if you don't have such a cd handy, and the way I offered is the the way such procedures where done for eons before the live-cd era. cheers marty Cheers, --Amos --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 1/11/2004 -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] 3d graphics viewing/modelling
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:52:42 +1100 Bruce Badger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.srainc.com/Jun/Manuals/Jun/OpenGLRotationModel/rotation_e.htm The 'surface of revolution' plugin for 3dom looks like it has similar functionality: http://threedom.sourceforge.net/screenshots.html also, surface evolver might do you want: http://www.susqu.edu/facstaff/b/brakke/evolver/ Matt -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Mepis - The good, The Bad and the...
> I have a 10 gig Mandrake partition, used perhaps 4 gig of it. I wanted to > create a directory on it and call it say "mepis-usr" then make it the /usr > directory, or make a subdirectory call "usr" to be /usr when I boot up > Mepis. Mandrake won't bother with it. > > I don't want to create another partition really, or is this the only way > to do it ? 1. Start in single user mode 2. Make sure the Mandrake partition is mounted, say, at /mnt 3. cp -a /usr /mnt/mepis-usr 4. rm -rf /usr 5. ln -s /mnt/mepis-usr /usr 6. Ensure that the Mandrake partition is automatically mounted (/etc/fstab) - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2005: Canberra, Australia http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ "I believe in true love. But I am easily satisfied." - Miguel de Icaza -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] How to rename partitions
Hi your problem might be that your initrd is not loading the libata drive for the devices! Thus they do not exist at boot up time, there for you can not mount it. Some initrd's have an option to goto to a shell whilst still in initrd phase. Try that and have a look around, although the command available to you are rather liminited Another thought is did you change your grub/lilo to change the root device ? What exactly is the error message ? Alex On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:58:26PM +1100, Rod Butcher wrote: > >I've heard (but not confirmed) the latest 2.6 > > SATA drivers do live under /dev/sd* instead of /dev/hd*. You'll need to > > confirm the your kernel actually supports it.> > I'm talking about 2.6.8 and up - they default to libata which refers to > SATA drives as SCSI and hence sda1 etc. so to load this kernel which > wants sda*, on a system built for 2.6.7 i.e. hda*, what do I change > apart from fstab ? > I can bootup 2.6.10 compiled to inhibit libata, and it accepts hda* > fine.. I'm using it as I speak... but this is deprecated. > So.. to bootup 2.6.10 using (the recommended) libata, I believe the > question is how do I rename my partitions to sda* ? > Changing the grub files and fstab didn't work. > I've asked this question before but still no luck. man fstab didn't help > me.. I'll RTFM if I can find what FM to RT. > cheers > Rod > --- > Brought to you by a thunderbird, penguin, gnu and a camel > > Keith Hopkins wrote: > >Rod Butcher wrote: > > > >>Hello sluggers, if I want to change the name of a drive & partition > >>from say hda1 to sda1, what do I need to do in addition to updating > >>/etc/fstab ? If I just change fstab and try to boot a kernel using > >>libata to access SATA drives, it can't find /dev/sda. > >>thanks > >>Rod > > > > > >Hi Rod, > > > > You can't just "change it" for the sake of changing it. The device > >name is (for the most part) assigned by the driver that controls that > >device. Once upon a time, SATA drives fell under the /dev/hd* model. > >If your kernel has that set of drivers, then you are stuck with > >/dev/hda, /dev/hda1, etc. I've heard (but not confirmed) the latest 2.6 > >SATA drivers do live under /dev/sd* instead of /dev/hd*. You'll need to > >confirm the your kernel actually supports it. > > > > Try booting your kernel into single user mode, and looking at dmesg to > >see how it maps the drives. You might even manage a `fdisk -l` > > > > > -- > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html > signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Building kernels [Was: Maybe trying out gentoo again]
On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 03:24:59PM +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > For a refresher, I have not seen what your thoughts are on security except > > to say someone has to listen to you and this list. > > My thoughts on security, in relation to the statement that started this > thread are: It is incorrect to say that building kernels is required for > securing servers, and there is substantial evidence provided in other mails > from myself and others on this thread that you will introduce more risk than > you will mitigate. I'd hate to turn this into a productive thread, but perhaps you could offer some insight on what steps you think *should* be taken as opposed to those that *should not* be taken in order to make a system secure. James. -- "Now, there are no problems only opportunities. However, this seemed to be an insurmountable opportunity." - http://www.surfare.net/~toolman/temp/diagram.html -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Building kernels [Was: Maybe trying out gentoo again]
On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 04:59:23PM +1100, O Plameras wrote: > > > When required it is applied to glibc. Again, priorites. > > With Solaries they warrant that their product will do > what they claim it will do. This is not the case with > Linux. Is that necessarily true? I thought that RHEL offered some guarantees for example. Can anyone else supply details? However, Oscar: I am, for the sake of argument willing to accept your position that unnecessary features should be disabled in order to maximise security. I mean, I don't leave a crow-bar lying next to my car when I park it. But, what I'd like to know is: how do you manage to apply security patches to all of these machines that you administer? Do you go to each one and manually apply the patch and rebuild/reboot etc? If that is what you do, how do you mitigate the risk of leaving some servers unpatched whilst working on others to go through this rigorous process? I'm interested in this for not entirely academic reasons -- the patching game is one that every software developer plays at some point or another. I have my own approaches but I'm interested in hearing yours. Thanks, James. -- "Now, there are no problems only opportunities. However, this seemed to be an insurmountable opportunity." - http://www.surfare.net/~toolman/temp/diagram.html -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Building kernels [Was: Maybe trying out gentoo again]
> I'd hate to turn this into a productive thread, but perhaps you could > offer some insight on what steps you think *should* be taken as opposed to > those that *should not* be taken in order to make a system secure. An enormous question, and not one that can easily be addressed in a single email, lest we stray into the dangerous territory of generalisations and platitudes. The purpose of the thread was to correct a vast misconception, not lay down the principles of security. - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2005: Canberra, Australia http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ "A 'lame' server is a server that is SUPPOSED to be authoritative, but, when asked, says: 'Me? I know nothing, I'm from Madrid!'" - Ralf Hildebrandt -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
[SLUG] ide-scsi on vanilla 2.6.9
Is there anybody using ide-scsi on a plain 2.6.9 kernel? "eject -t" (on /dev/sr0) doesn't seem to be working anymore. Vino Fernando Crescini Intelligent Systems Laboratory School of Computing & IT University of Western Sydney Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 61 2 4736 0140 Web: http://www.cit.uws.edu.au/~jcrescin Scanned by SCIT E-Mail Gateway http://www.cit.uws.edu.au -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Building kernels [Was: Maybe trying out gentoo again]
James Gregory wrote: However, Oscar: I am, for the sake of argument willing to accept your position that unnecessary features should be disabled in order to maximise security. I mean, I don't leave a crow-bar lying next to my car when I park it. But, what I'd like to know is: how do you manage to apply security patches to all of these machines that you administer? Do you go to each one and manually apply the patch and rebuild/reboot etc? If that is what you do, how do you mitigate the risk of leaving some servers unpatched whilst working on others to go through this rigorous process? How to manage and apply security? Similar and a little more than how you manage the distribution, and maintenance of some Linux Distro. Once a working system is done, that includes recompilation, testing, and then auditing, the master copy of the source and package binaries are place in some secure place in accordance with a prescribed security policy. Some small organisations would put their copies in Bank Safe Deposit Boxes. But larger organisations build special places for the safety and security of these things. From then on, installation, distribution, and maintenance is the same as you would with any system. So, for a kernel-bridge-firewall installation for example build-once and distribute-to-many is the procedure. One does not re-compile physically on each computer in the organization every time there is a patch that is to be made. BTW, the exclusion process of parts of OS is operationalised thru the standard kernel reconfiguration process. So, the kernel re-compilation is exactly the same as one re-builds kernels, except for the fact that you have lots of "#CONFIG_ is not set" in your .config file. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] ide-scsi on vanilla 2.6.9
it depends on how you've built the kernel but scsi emulation is being depreciated and you should be able to burn directly to the ide device now. for example if you use cdrecord, you no longer have to use the lun's but can call the /dev/hd* directly. regards, brett On Sunday 07 November 2004 02:13, Vino Fernando Crescini wrote: > Is there anybody using ide-scsi on a plain 2.6.9 kernel? "eject -t" (on > /dev/sr0) doesn't seem to be working anymore. > > Vino Fernando Crescini > Intelligent Systems Laboratory > School of Computing & IT > University of Western Sydney > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Phone: 61 2 4736 0140 > Web: http://www.cit.uws.edu.au/~jcrescin > > > Scanned by SCIT E-Mail Gateway http://www.cit.uws.edu.au -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Building kernels [Was: Maybe trying out gentoo again]
On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 04:35 +1100, O Plameras wrote: > From then on, installation, distribution, and maintenance is the same as > you would with any system. So, for a kernel-bridge-firewall installation > for example build-once and distribute-to-many is the procedure. One does > not re-compile physically on each computer in the organization every > time there is a patch that is to be made. I think that the original question had two parts which you have not answered: a) How do you ensure your 'master' is current with all the patches? It would be interesting to be specific. How did you deal with the Debian break-in for example? Did you have the AM patches in already or did you include them and roll them out urgently? As an aside do you rely on kernel source trees or distribution source trees. I use Debian source to build my firewall's kernel so I get the benefit of any patching that debian may have done. b) How do you ensure that your clients are updated to the revised copy on an ongoing process? It is a serious problem because rolling out security updates is a low priority problem for a number of smaller companies because 'I have not been hacked yet'. (Kind of like my home backup principles :-) ) Unless you install yourself. PS: While the break-in is not a glowing recommendation on Debian :-( We can all afford to learn and see the fact that security is a real problem of balance between stability and security. It even destroys those who describe uptime as a measure of success. (So you have not applied kernel patches for 2 years on your firewall, interesting...) -- Ken Foskey -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] ide-scsi on vanilla 2.6.9
On 07 Nov 2004 10:56 EST you wrote: > > it depends on how you've built the kernel but scsi emulation is being > depreciated and you should be able to burn directly to the ide device now. > for example if you use cdrecord, you no longer have to use the lun's but can > call the /dev/hd* directly. > > regards, brett > thanks. cdrecord complains loudly when used with dev=/dev/hdc: Warning: Open by 'devname' is unintentional and not supported. then again, with dev=ATA:1,0,0 i get the following: Warning: Using badly designed ATAPI via /dev/hd* interface. but despite the warnings, the latter seems to be working fine so far, even with cdrecord-prodvd. -- Vino Fernando Crescini [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cit.uws.edu.au/~jcrescin Scanned by SCIT E-Mail Gateway http://www.cit.uws.edu.au -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Debian kernel question
> "Steven" == Steven Chang-Lin Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Steven> Alan L Tyree wrote: >> I'm running Debian testing on one of my machines. If I just run >> >> apt-get install kernel-image-xxx-xxx >> >> does that install a new kernel completely or do I need to do other >> things to get it to run properly? Just reboot. Steven> You need to edit GRUB or LILO to load up the new kernel image This isn't necessary *unless* you've edited lilo.conf to a non-standard configuration. -- Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au The technical we do immediately, the political takes *forever* -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Building kernels [Was: Maybe trying out gentoo again]
Ken Foskey wrote: a) How do you ensure your 'master' is current with all the patches? As one would with any Linux Kernel and application. It would be interesting to be specific. How did you deal with the Debian break-in for example? Did you have the AM patches in already or did you include them and roll them out urgently? Can't be specific for obvious reasons. The Debian break-in is unfortunate (http://www.wiggy.net/debian/explanation). Their access procedure is different as I can gather. As an aside do you rely on kernel source trees or distribution source trees. I use Debian source to build my firewall's kernel so I get the benefit of any patching that debian may have done. Again, can't be specific. b) How do you ensure that your clients are updated to the revised copy on an ongoing process? The important thing as always is management processes. Each client has their standard operating procedures that lets them update on a regular basis as well as emergency basis. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] ide-scsi on vanilla 2.6.9
On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 03:23:09PM +1000, Vino Fernando Crescini said > On 07 Nov 2004 10:56 EST you wrote: > > > > > it depends on how you've built the kernel but scsi emulation is being > > depreciated and you should be able to burn directly to the ide device now. > > for example if you use cdrecord, you no longer have to use the lun's but > > can > > call the /dev/hd* directly. > > > > regards, brett > > > > thanks. cdrecord complains loudly when used with dev=/dev/hdc: > > Warning: Open by 'devname' is unintentional and not supported. It should still work, the warning should not be there. -rob -- Words of the day:North Korea White Water Debian radar propaganda Reno AFSPC -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] How to rename partitions
all you need to change is fstab as long as your are referencing the drive correctly then it should be fine. this is all i did when i cut over and it's no probs, in fact i still have old kernels in grub and to boot off one of them i simply edit fstab and go back. brett On Saturday 06 November 2004 20:58, Rod Butcher wrote: > >I've heard (but not confirmed) the latest 2.6 > > SATA drivers do live under /dev/sd* instead of /dev/hd*. You'll need to > > confirm the your kernel actually supports it.> > > I'm talking about 2.6.8 and up - they default to libata which refers to > SATA drives as SCSI and hence sda1 etc. so to load this kernel which > wants sda*, on a system built for 2.6.7 i.e. hda*, what do I change > apart from fstab ? > I can bootup 2.6.10 compiled to inhibit libata, and it accepts hda* > fine.. I'm using it as I speak... but this is deprecated. > So.. to bootup 2.6.10 using (the recommended) libata, I believe the > question is how do I rename my partitions to sda* ? > Changing the grub files and fstab didn't work. > I've asked this question before but still no luck. man fstab didn't help > me.. I'll RTFM if I can find what FM to RT. > cheers > Rod > --- > Brought to you by a thunderbird, penguin, gnu and a camel > > Keith Hopkins wrote: > > Rod Butcher wrote: > >> Hello sluggers, if I want to change the name of a drive & partition > >> from say hda1 to sda1, what do I need to do in addition to updating > >> /etc/fstab ? If I just change fstab and try to boot a kernel using > >> libata to access SATA drives, it can't find /dev/sda. > >> thanks > >> Rod > > > > Hi Rod, > > > > You can't just "change it" for the sake of changing it. The device > > name is (for the most part) assigned by the driver that controls that > > device. Once upon a time, SATA drives fell under the /dev/hd* model. > > If your kernel has that set of drivers, then you are stuck with > > /dev/hda, /dev/hda1, etc. I've heard (but not confirmed) the latest 2.6 > > SATA drivers do live under /dev/sd* instead of /dev/hd*. You'll need to > > confirm the your kernel actually supports it. > > > > Try booting your kernel into single user mode, and looking at dmesg to > > see how it maps the drives. You might even manage a `fdisk -l` -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
