Oops...
I rechecked:
on that x86_64 :
instead
/mkufs -O=1 /test/disk-imag
it should have been
/mkufs -O 1 /test/disk-imag
and now mkufs and mount works ok on that x86_64 machine.
Regards,
Rami Rosen
On 9/27/06, Rami Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Well following this I had launched a t
Hi,
Well following this I had launched a trial on x86_64
running fedora core 4 kernel.
THere were problems with the mkufs :
/mkufs -O=1 /test/disk-imag
gives:
=2: bad file system format value
and also
/mkufs -O=2 /test/disk-imag
gives:
=2: bad file system format value
So maybe there is a pr
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:02:44PM +0300, Rami Rosen wrote:
> Hi Muli,
>
> >I doubt it (did you try it?).
>
> Now I tried it, on Fedora Core 4 (on x86).
>
> It works like a charm! feel free to try it ...
I did, on Suse 9 SP2 (x86-64) with a 2.6.18 kernel with both -O1 and
-O2 and neither worked
Hi Muli,
I doubt it (did you try it?).
Now I tried it, on Fedora Core 4 (on x86).
It works like a charm! feel free to try it ...
Aftrer applying the patch and "modprbe ufs" I ran that series of commands,
but mkfus like this :
/mkufs -O 1 /test/disk-image
Rhere was no error in mount , and
run
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 03:47:28PM +0300, Dan Shimshoni wrote:
> Did anyone had success with this ?
Ok, I took a quick look at it. It appears that mkufs and fs/ufs/ do
not agree about the superblock location and/or the magic number:
UFSD (/home/muli/w/iommu/calgary/linux/fs/ufs/super.c, 612):
u
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 04:32:08PM +0300, Rami Rosen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Try ./mkufs -O 1 /test/disk-image instead of
> /mkufs /test/disk-image
>
> there are 2
> file system formats for mkufs : 1 => UFS1, 2 => UFS2
>
> see also : mkufs -help.
>
> This should work.
I doubt it (did you try it?).
Hi,
Try ./mkufs -O 1 /test/disk-image instead of
/mkufs /test/disk-image
there are 2
file system formats for mkufs : 1 => UFS1, 2 => UFS2
see also : mkufs -help.
This should work.
Regards,
Rami Rosen
On 9/26/06, Dan Shimshoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello linux-il,
First, running th
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 02:56:10PM +0300, Dan Shimshoni wrote:
> mount -o loop -t ufs /test/disk-image /loopDir
>
> I get:
> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/loop1,
> or too many mounted file systems
> (could this be the IDE device where you in fact use
>
Yedidyah,> Doesn't the kernel ('dmesg | tail') say anything?Yes , it does.running: mount -r -o loop,ufstype=old -t ufs /test/disk-image /loopDir
the kernel logs emits: ufs_read_super: bad magic numberperhaps is this mkufs problem (or because of running it in conjunction with loop device, which is l
Helllo,from man mount : Mount options for ufs ufstype=value...old Old format of ufs, this is the default, read only. (Don't forget to give the -r option.)
the other options (like 44bsd,sun,sunx86 ) seems unrelevant since this ufs was created on linux.Anyhow I
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 04:12:55PM +0300, Dan Shimshoni wrote:
> perhaps is this mkufs problem (or because
> of running it in conjunction with loop device, which is less
> likely).
It's not the loop device, I get the same thing with a raw partition.
Cheers,
Muli
Hello linux-il,First, running this series of actions (as many know) creates and mountsan ext3 filesystem on my linux machine:dd if=/dev/zero of=/test/disk-image count=10240mkfs -t ext3 /test/disk-image
mount -o loop -t ext3 /test/disk-image /loopDirls /loopDir => gives lost+foundNow I tried the s
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 03:47:28PM +0300, Dan Shimshoni wrote:
> Helllo,
>
> from man mount :
>
> Mount options for ufs
> ufstype=value
> ..
> oldOld format of ufs, this is the default, read only.
> (Don't forget to give the -r option.)
>
> ...
> the other opt
13 matches
Mail list logo
