I got no on topic responses, but I did find this Dell firmware release
for the DRAC5:
Release Date: 12/31/2009
Version:1.51, A00
Download Type: Firmware
Fixes and Enhancements:
*SysRq magic key doesnt work on dell systems remotely
...
Never mind the missing apostrophe... I've d
On 2010-06-04 16:47, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> Jefferson Ogata wrote:
>> How important is the content of this system. Do you have another system
>> you can image the disk to in case you do something destructive
>
> Well here is the thing. We had a 'standby' server that basically
> would copy eve
On 2010-06-04 19:14, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> What jefferson says is correct, I can mount the volume with the rescue
> cd, in /mnt/sysimage.
>
> If I browse around (within /mnt/sysimage) I can see 'everything', not
> just etc.
>
> However, /initrd is empty and in /etc there are a bunch of dama
fine. In rescue mode, you can do debugfs or "e2fsck -f -b 32768.." on the
/dev/mapper/volume and try to get a good superblock and correct the filesystem.
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Croonenberg"
To: "Bond Masuda"
Cc: "linux-poweredge"
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2010 12:11:53 P
I have a pair of RAID-1 disks on an M605 blade.
I want to move those disks (unchanged) to a different M605
blade, but the RAID controller complains.
How does one do this WITHOUT destroying the data on the disks?
--- Cris
--
Cristopher J. Rhea
Mayo Clinic - Research Com
right,
I am actually thinking about moving the date to another machine and/or
put it on another device.
(the rescue cd gives me the option to activate the network interfaces,
that way I could scp or ftp it to another machine and inspect the
retrieved data before anything else.)
Bond Masu
On Fri, June 4, 2010 13:03, Jefferson Ogata wrote:
> On 2010-06-04 16:58, Robin Bowes wrote:
>> On 04/06/10 17:51, J. Epperson wrote:
>>> On Fri, June 4, 2010 12:08, Jefferson Ogata wrote:
On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
In ca
Well,
I seem to have :
/dev/sda1 that is labeled /root
/dev/sda2 labeled something that says LVM
I found that using fdisk -l
But it seems you guys know what you are talking about, I'll follow the
discussion
Robin Bowes wrote:
> On 04/06/10 17:51, J. Epperson wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Ju
What jefferson says is correct, I can mount the volume with the rescue
cd, in /mnt/sysimage.
If I browse around (within /mnt/sysimage) I can see 'everything', not
just etc.
However, /initrd is empty and in /etc there are a bunch of damaged
files, initrd.conf, ldap.conf ... but those are jus
To be honest, I have never used IPMI with bonded NICs but seeing as
the bond is done at the software level (in the OS) I don't understand
why IPMI would stop working?
Its running at a lower level? Yes the switch may have to be set to
bond two ports together but the switch should still recognise th
On 2010-06-04 17:17, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
>> In what sense are these systems "fried"? Can you move the RAID
>> controller and disks from one system to another?
>
> Uhm, no. the machine I am talking about now has the hardware repaired,
> by putting in a new raid kit.
> Moving it to another ser
> In what sense are these systems "fried"? Can you move the RAID
> controller and disks from one system to another?
>
Uhm, no. the machine I am talking about now has the hardware repaired,
by putting in a new raid kit.
Moving it to another server (I don't have another 2850, I have a few
m
> Regardless of default install layout, we have a "bad" superblock on
> /dev/sda2 and /dev/sda2 marked as an LVM device. The evidence is strong
> that / is an LV within the PV that is on /dev/sda2. If you tried to
> recover a superblock directly on /dev/sda2 you would wipe out who knows
> what.
>
Actually, you would want to try and recover the superblock from the
/dev/mapper/.. device.
So, follow the commands for recovery of an ext3 filesystem, but use
/dev/mapper/... instead of /dev/sdb2.
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Croonenberg"
To: "Jefferson Ogata"
Cc: linux-pow
On 2010-06-04 18:57, Paul M. Dyer wrote:
> Actually, you would want to try and recover the superblock from the
> /dev/mapper/.. device.
No, given that he already said he can see /etc, albeit missing important
things, his superblock is almost certainly intact.
__
Jefferson Ogata wrote:
> On 2010-06-04 17:08, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
>
>> Here is what is in /dev/mapper/
>>
>> 10, 63 control
>> 253, 0 VolGroup00-LogVol00
>> 253, 1 VolGroup00-LogVol01
>>
>
> And what do you get from:
>
> e2label /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00
> e2label /dev/mapper/Vo
On 2010-06-04 17:43, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> ok here's what I see:
>
> e2label /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00 : nothing, empty line
That's *probably* your root partition. This is the important thing to image.
For future reference, you should always partition your systems
appropriately. Don'
Jefferson Ogata wrote:
> I meant the other way around. If the two backup systems are "fried" but
> you can get their disks running on alternate "non-fried" systems, you
> can recover your data from those.
>
gotcha. well the one machine was not a raid, and one drive is toast,
doesn't even sp
- Original Message -
| Well,
|
| I seem to have :
|
| /dev/sda1 that is labeled /root
| /dev/sda2 labeled something that says LVM
|
| I found that using fdisk -l
|
| But it seems you guys know what you are talking about, I'll follow the
| discussion
|
Ok, here are some commands to h
On 2010-06-04 17:08, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> Here is what is in /dev/mapper/
>
> 10, 63 control
> 253, 0 VolGroup00-LogVol00
> 253, 1 VolGroup00-LogVol01
And what do you get from:
e2label /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00
e2label /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol01
(or, alternately):
e2label /de
Here is what is in /dev/mapper/
10, 63 control
253, 0 VolGroup00-LogVol00
253, 1 VolGroup00-LogVol01
Jefferson Ogata wrote:
> On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
>
>> it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
>>
>
> In case it isn't clear to you, BTW, this means that /dev/sda2
On 2010-06-04 16:58, Robin Bowes wrote:
> On 04/06/10 17:51, J. Epperson wrote:
>> On Fri, June 4, 2010 12:08, Jefferson Ogata wrote:
>>> On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
>>>
>>> In case it isn't clear to you, BTW, this means that /dev/sda2 is
On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 12:47 -0400, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> Well here is the thing. We had a 'standby' server that basically
> would copy everything every night and in case something bad ever would
> happen to the main server we could run it off that one.
> However that one got fried during t
On 04/06/10 17:51, J. Epperson wrote:
> On Fri, June 4, 2010 12:08, Jefferson Ogata wrote:
>> On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
>>> it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
>>
>> In case it isn't clear to you, BTW, this means that /dev/sda2 is NOT /.
>>
>
> ?Does it?
Hmm, I queried that
On Fri, June 4, 2010 12:08, Jefferson Ogata wrote:
> On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
>> it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
>
> In case it isn't clear to you, BTW, this means that /dev/sda2 is NOT /.
>
?Does it?
___
Linux-PowerEdge maili
Jefferson Ogata wrote:
> On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
>
>> Jefferson Ogata wrote:
>>
>>> What does your partition table actually say? Is /dev/sda2 *supposed* to
>>> be a filesystem, or is an LVM physical volume?
>>>
>> it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
>>
>
On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
In case it isn't clear to you, BTW, this means that /dev/sda2 is NOT /.
Check what devices you have under /dev/mapper/.
___
Linux-PowerEdge mailing list
Linux-PowerEd
On 2010-06-04 15:42, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> Jefferson Ogata wrote:
>> What does your partition table actually say? Is /dev/sda2 *supposed* to
>> be a filesystem, or is an LVM physical volume?
>
> it says that /dev/sda2 is an LVM volume
In that case, I strongly suggest that you *not* follow any
Hey,
I am having problems with running IPMI on my servers that have network bonding
enabled.
Platform: CentOS release 5.3 (Final)
Kernel: 2.6.18-92.el5
64bit Dell PowerEdge 1950
Ethernet Driver Info:
driver: bnx2
version: 1.9.3
firmware-version: 4.4.1 ipms 1.6.0
I read an old thread on the
Jefferson Ogata wrote:
> On 2010-06-03 17:38, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
>
>> I already did that.
>>
>> I have /dev/sda1 and /dev/sda2
>>
>> if I run fsck on /dev/sda1 it warns about not finding /etc/fstab but
>> than says that /boot is fine.
>>
>> when I run fsck on /dev/sda2 I get the same fs
On 2010-06-03 17:38, Ron Croonenberg wrote:
> I already did that.
>
> I have /dev/sda1 and /dev/sda2
>
> if I run fsck on /dev/sda1 it warns about not finding /etc/fstab but
> than says that /boot is fine.
>
> when I run fsck on /dev/sda2 I get the same fstab warning but then says
> it can
Hi Paul,
that is corrects, /dev/sda1 is /boot and /dev/sda2 is /.
I know that both are ext3, actually in my /etc/fstab it shows that both
are mounted as ext3.
However with the rescue disk it, it tells me that /boot is fine but
that /dev/sda2 is ext2 with issues.
I was wondering, is using
Hi Ron,
>From what I can understand: sda1 is /boot, sda2 is /.
http://kezhong.wordpress.com/2009/06/27/linux-ext2ext3-superblock-recovery/
This link has good info on recovering the superblock on ext2 and ext3. Both
ext2/ext3 have the same format, but ext3 uses journals.
Since you have other
Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> We have Dell 1950 and 2950 servers with DRAC version 1.20 firmware, and
> normally use putty or OpenSSH to connect. As far as well can tell the
> serial 'break' does not equate to the SysRq key as documented.
>
> These servers run Debian Linux, and we periodically have prob
34 matches
Mail list logo
