http://linuxvm.org/info/HOWTOs/movefs.html
Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: James Melin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Fat 3390-mod 9's. Once upon a time, our former storage administrator carved up a new shark box and gave me 8 3390-mod 9's and 8 3390-mod 3's, for 2 Linux Lpars. Things went merrily along until we attempted to do a disaster recovery test of Linux, where I discovered that the 3390-9's were exactly 100 cylinders too large. So I have mod-9 architected dasd carved up in ESS (shark) box, at 10117 cyl, as opposed to 10017 cyl. Near as we can tell this was a fat finger mistake. This HAS resulted in my being unable to use dfdss tools to restore the backup to a real mod 9, because the dataset is too big. I am fortunate that 1/2 of the aforementioned dasd has not been made into a system, and I can re-format those partitions under Linux to be the correct size, and then use an internal copy process to copy the data. The questions I have are this: How many 4096 byte blocks make up 10117 cylinders without going over, and allowing room for the VTOC? Secondly, since DD will likely not work to copy the current images to the slightly smaller partitions on the other volumes, does anyone have a preferred method of doing a file system copy that will copy everything verbatim (keep the user info, group info, symlinks etc) but do it at the file level? I have looked at pax and tar, and they have me confused on the exact syntax to accomplish what I want. DD is the most straightforward, but I am concerned that using a block level disk copy tool I will lose data or otherwise munge things moving to a smaller partition. The file system utilization is low Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/dasdb1 7169608 255592 6549812 4% / /dev/dasdc1 7169608 40264 6765140 1% /var /dev/dasdd1 7169608 4039356 2766048 60% /opt /dev/dasde1 7169608 838428 5966976 13% /usr /dev/dasdf1 858100 9280 805232 2% /tmp So, can I get away with a dd copy, then mount everything under /mnt and zipl, or does the collected wisdom of the list suggest another method? If so what is the syntax that will succeed at doing what DD does, but at the file level instead of block level? -James
