>>> Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/09/03 11:13AM >>>
>On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, DAVID THOMPSON wrote:
>> I am a relatively new FreeBSD user and I have never posted a
>> for help before so I hope I am doing this right and not plugging up
>> board with irrelevant and out of context questions. My apologies if
>> am. Here is my problem:
>Welcome to the club!
>> I have vinum installed on my FreeBSD 5.1-Release box. Vinum starts

actually it is 5.0-Release...my mistake

>> runs fine, but I can't fsck any of the volumes because it says...
>> "fsck: Could not determine filesystem type."
>> If I do a fsck -t ufs /dev/vinum/??? it will work fine, but it's
when I
>> don't explicity tell fsck what the filesystem type is that I get
>> error.
>You probably didn't disklabel the disk.  Do a "man disklabel".  In
>particular, you should do:
>   disklabel -w /dev/vinum/??? auto
> Edit the disklabel:
>   disklabel -e /dev/vinum/???
> Then newfs:
>   newfs /dev/vinum/???
>Note that you can potentially trash the system with all this, so
>read the section in the handbook on setting up vinum and/or
>before doing this on a production system.  In fact, test on a scratch




unfortunately I did run the disklabel route and everything checks out.
I have fdisk'd, disklabel'd, and reconfigured my drives so many times I

have dreams about it. The only difference between my box at home 
and the one at work is that I ran a cvsup and portupgrade on my one
at home when I was doing the initial install. Is there a possiblity
the fsck binary is somehow the wrong rev.? I am trying to understand
how fsck determines the filesystem, and I thought this was done by 
checking the superblock. However, it seems that the superblock only
denotes one definition of filesystem type (e.g. FreeBSD, vinum, etc.) 
and not the other definition (e.g. ufs, ext3, etc...). At least these
the two definitions of fstype that I know of. So I am still stuck at
to determine how fsck automatically determines the second definition
of fstype. Remember that fsck works if I explicitly tell it to use ufs.
other theory is that maybe my newfs binary isn't doing it's thing. My 
understanding was that in version 5.0 ufs2 would be the default, but
it seems like my newfs uses ufs1 as it's default. This makes me wonder

if maybe other things aren't working as they should. Any ideas, leads,
thoughts, or suggestions are always appreciated... thanks again.


This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information which is
privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent
of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error
please notify us immediately by replying to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to