Re: [CentOS] Parted Bug? in C 5.9
On 5/9/2013 8:53 PM, Andrew Reis wrote:
> I'm receiving the following error when trying to repartition and reformat a
> USB flash drive via parted using a simple script. The bug follows:
>
>
>
> /sbin/parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary fat32
has the USB key been labeled?
frankly, most of my USB keys don't even have a partition table, they
just have a single file system ('mkfs.fat32 /dev/sdb')
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Parted Bug? in C 5.9
File bugreport at redhat (upstream) bugzilla? 10.5.2013 6.54 "Andrew Reis" kirjoitti: > > -Original Message- > From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > Behalf > Of Andrew Reis > Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2013 3:33 PM > To: centos@centos.org > Cc: j...@dbmsinc.com > Subject: [CentOS] Parted Bug? in C 5.9 > > I'm receiving the following error when trying to repartition and reformat a > USB flash drive via parted using a simple script. The bug follows: > > > > /sbin/parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary fat32 > > Backtrace has 14 calls on stack: > > 14: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_assert+0x3b) [0x10af3b] > > 13: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146194] > > 12: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146f4d] > > 11: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1483c7] > > 10: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1103e7] > > 9: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_add_partition+0x295) [0x112e65] > > 8: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a2c3] > > 7: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a505] > > 6: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_new+0xa3) [0x113c23] > > 5: /sbin/parted [0x804e2ef] > > 4: /sbin/parted(non_interactive_mode+0x7c) [0x8052c9c] > > 3: /sbin/parted(main+0x58) [0x8050f58] > > 2: /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdc) [0x94cebc] > > 1: /sbin/parted [0x804b521] > > You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do: > > Don't panic! The bug has most likely not affected any of your data. > > Help us to fix this bug by doing the following: > > Check whether the bug has already been fixed by checking > > the last version of GNU Parted that you can find at: > > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/parted/ > > Please check this version prior to bug reporting. > > If this has not been fixed yet or if you don't know how to check, > > please visit the GNU Parted website: > > http://www.gnu.org/software/parted > > for further information. > > Your report should contain the version of this release (1.8.1) > > along with the error message below, the output of > > parted DEVICE unit co print unit s print > > and additional information about your setup you consider important. > > Assertion (head_size <= 63) at dos.c:623 in function > probe_partition_for_geom() > > failed. > > Backtrace has 15 calls on stack: > > 15: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_assert+0x3b) [0x10af3b] > > 14: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146194] > > 13: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146f4d] > > 12: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1483c7] > > 11: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1103e7] > > 10: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_add_partition+0x295) [0x112e65] > > 9: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a2c3] > > 8: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a505] > > 7: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a7a5] > > 6: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_new+0xa3) [0x113c23] > > 5: /sbin/parted [0x804e2ef] > > 4: /sbin/parted(non_interactive_mode+0x7c) [0x8052c9c] > > 3: /sbin/parted(main+0x58) [0x8050f58] > > 2: /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdc) [0x94cebc] > > 1: /sbin/parted [0x804b521] > > You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do: > > Don't panic! The bug has most likely not affected any of your data. > > Help us to fix this bug by doing the following: > > Check whether the bug has already been fixed by checking > > the last version of GNU Parted that you can find at: > > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/parted/ > > Please check this version prior to bug reporting. > > If this has not been fixed yet or if you don't know how to check, > > please visit the GNU Parted website: > > http://www.gnu.org/software/parted > > for further information. > > Your report should contain the version of this release (1.8.1) > > along with the error message below, the output of > > parted DEVICE unit co print unit s print > > and additional information about your setup you consider important. > > Assertion (head_size <= 63) at dos.c:623 in function > probe_partition_for_geom() > > failed. > > > > Output of parted /dev/sdb unit co print unit s print: > > > > parted /dev/sdb unit co print unit s print > > Backtrace has 14 calls on stack: > > 14: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_assert+0x3b) [0x10af3b] > > 13: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146194] > > 12: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146f4d] > > 11: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1483c7] > > 10: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1103e7] > > 9: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_add_partition+0x295) [0x112e65] > > 8: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a2c3] > > 7: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a505] > > 6: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_new+0xa3) [0x113c23] > > 5: parted [0x804d21b] > > 4: parted(non_interactive_mode+0x7c) [0x8052c9c] > > 3: parted(main+0x58) [0x8050f58] > > 2: /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdc) [0x94cebc] > > 1: parted [0x804b521] > > You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do: > > Don't panic! The bug has most likely not affected any of your data. > > Help us to fix this bug by doing the f
Re: [CentOS] Parted Bug? in C 5.9
-Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Reis Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2013 3:33 PM To: centos@centos.org Cc: j...@dbmsinc.com Subject: [CentOS] Parted Bug? in C 5.9 I'm receiving the following error when trying to repartition and reformat a USB flash drive via parted using a simple script. The bug follows: /sbin/parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary fat32 Backtrace has 14 calls on stack: 14: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_assert+0x3b) [0x10af3b] 13: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146194] 12: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146f4d] 11: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1483c7] 10: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1103e7] 9: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_add_partition+0x295) [0x112e65] 8: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a2c3] 7: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a505] 6: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_new+0xa3) [0x113c23] 5: /sbin/parted [0x804e2ef] 4: /sbin/parted(non_interactive_mode+0x7c) [0x8052c9c] 3: /sbin/parted(main+0x58) [0x8050f58] 2: /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdc) [0x94cebc] 1: /sbin/parted [0x804b521] You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do: Don't panic! The bug has most likely not affected any of your data. Help us to fix this bug by doing the following: Check whether the bug has already been fixed by checking the last version of GNU Parted that you can find at: http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/parted/ Please check this version prior to bug reporting. If this has not been fixed yet or if you don't know how to check, please visit the GNU Parted website: http://www.gnu.org/software/parted for further information. Your report should contain the version of this release (1.8.1) along with the error message below, the output of parted DEVICE unit co print unit s print and additional information about your setup you consider important. Assertion (head_size <= 63) at dos.c:623 in function probe_partition_for_geom() failed. Backtrace has 15 calls on stack: 15: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_assert+0x3b) [0x10af3b] 14: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146194] 13: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146f4d] 12: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1483c7] 11: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1103e7] 10: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_add_partition+0x295) [0x112e65] 9: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a2c3] 8: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a505] 7: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a7a5] 6: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_new+0xa3) [0x113c23] 5: /sbin/parted [0x804e2ef] 4: /sbin/parted(non_interactive_mode+0x7c) [0x8052c9c] 3: /sbin/parted(main+0x58) [0x8050f58] 2: /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdc) [0x94cebc] 1: /sbin/parted [0x804b521] You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do: Don't panic! The bug has most likely not affected any of your data. Help us to fix this bug by doing the following: Check whether the bug has already been fixed by checking the last version of GNU Parted that you can find at: http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/parted/ Please check this version prior to bug reporting. If this has not been fixed yet or if you don't know how to check, please visit the GNU Parted website: http://www.gnu.org/software/parted for further information. Your report should contain the version of this release (1.8.1) along with the error message below, the output of parted DEVICE unit co print unit s print and additional information about your setup you consider important. Assertion (head_size <= 63) at dos.c:623 in function probe_partition_for_geom() failed. Output of parted /dev/sdb unit co print unit s print: parted /dev/sdb unit co print unit s print Backtrace has 14 calls on stack: 14: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_assert+0x3b) [0x10af3b] 13: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146194] 12: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x146f4d] 11: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1483c7] 10: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x1103e7] 9: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_add_partition+0x295) [0x112e65] 8: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a2c3] 7: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0 [0x14a505] 6: /usr/lib/libparted-1.8.so.0(ped_disk_new+0xa3) [0x113c23] 5: parted [0x804d21b] 4: parted(non_interactive_mode+0x7c) [0x8052c9c] 3: parted(main+0x58) [0x8050f58] 2: /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdc) [0x94cebc] 1: parted [0x804b521] You found a bug in GNU Parted! Here's what you have to do: Don't panic! The bug has most likely not affected any of your data. Help us to fix this bug by doing the following: Check whether the bug has already been fixed by checking the last version of GNU Parted that you can find at: http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/parted/ Please check this version prior to bug reporting. If this has not been fixed yet or if you don't know how to check, please visit the GNU Parted website: http://www.gnu.org/software/parted for further information. Yo
Re: [CentOS] Missing printer driver
On Thu, 09 May 2013 10:49:01 +0200 Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > On 05/09/2013 03:29 AM, Steve Blackwell wrote: > > Lexmark 2600 > Download this driver : > http://downloads.lexmark.com/downloads/cpd/lexmark-inkjet-08-driver-1.0-1.i386.rpm.sh.zip > It is intended for Fedora 12, but should work for EL6 as well. > Thanks for the link. I'll try it this weekend. Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Need a Centos 6 USB hard drive recovery procedure
On 2013-05-10, Rock wrote: > > In fact, even though it has said there were only 10 minutes > to go for the past 20 hours or so, the file count keeps > climbing. > http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12893269/img/12893269.jpeg > > The problem is that, even though Recuva lists the hierarchy > where the files are coming from, it is putting all 70,000 > files in the same directory! Is it already "putting" your files somewhere? If so it's almost certainly too late to throw a linux recovery tool at it. --keith -- kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Need a Centos 6 USB hard drive recovery procedure
On Thursday 09 May 2013, Rock wrote: > d) I backed up all the data files onto the 150GB USB drive How did you back up? > e) I disconnected the 150GB USB drive Did you "safely remove" the USB drive as shown here? http://etc.usf.edu/techease/win/hardware/how-do-i-safely-remove-a-usb- device-from-my-computer/ But this is really a Windows question, and I think you're out of luck. -- Yves Bellefeuille Mekaro en Otavo, Kanado, 18-20 majo 2013: http://mekaro.ca/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Supermicro & Boot Failures with DVD Centos 6.2
> Laurent, > > That is interesting !!! > > We tried to boot do the i386 and then an x64 6.4 install discs this > morning, and were stopped at the familiar first line. Do you know if > anyone has put in a bug report on this? Well…I found few messages about it, and it looks like people aren't sure about the cause…software bug ? BIOS bug ? Isolinux guys report it to BIOS, and of course we don't hear about BIOS guys. So pick your choice ;) Anyway, I haven't found any other solution…and once I found the 6.0 trick I stopped research here. Regards, Laurent Wandrebeck HYGEOS, Earth Observation Department / Observation de la Terre Euratechnologies 165 Avenue de Bretagne 59000 Lille, France tel: +33 3 20 08 24 98 http://www.hygeos.com GPG fingerprint/Empreinte GPG: F5CA 37A4 6D03 A90C 7A1D 2A62 54E6 EF2C D17C F64C -- Laurent, I took a look at the centos bugs and found this. http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=5377 I am not sure if my problem is related to this particular problem, but there was a similar note attached to this bug, I also added a note. It does not look to me like anyone is addressing the problem. I am glad the 6.0 archive is available. I will try your suggestion next. Thanks for your help Greg -- I wanted to post a follow up note on this thread to help others that have this same problem. The CentOs 6.0 dvd has worked perfectly which means we can install CentOS on this machine. The 6.2 and 6.4 dvd's were not usable and would not boot. It does not appear that this problem is getting much attention, so we may have some difficulty with 6.+ or 7. Greg Ennis ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Need a Centos 6 USB hard drive recovery procedure
On Thu, 09 May 2013 16:51:48 -0400, m.roth-x6lchVBUigD1P9xLtpHBDw wrote: > Are you sure that the FAT was mangled, and not just the MBR? How can I tell? All I know is the following: a) The WinXP PC had a virus or something making it slow b) So I decided to re-install the WinXP OS c) I connected the 150GB USB drive to the WinXP PC d) I backed up all the data files onto the 150GB USB drive e) I disconnected the 150GB USB drive f) I repartitioned & re-installed Windows XP on the PC g) Then I plugged the backup 150GB USB drive back in It gave a message that it was unrecognized or corrupted. So I googled, & found a Microsoft Support page saying to run: chkdsk /F E: So I ran that, and now the USB drive was recognized. But it "appeared" empty. So I asked how to recover and people said use "Recuva". So I installed Recuva 24 hours ago; it's still running, on the hard disk drive: http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12893214/img/12893214.jpg In fact, even though it has said there were only 10 minutes to go for the past 20 hours or so, the file count keeps climbing. http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12893269/img/12893269.jpeg The problem is that, even though Recuva lists the hierarchy where the files are coming from, it is putting all 70,000 files in the same directory! Given that information, which is really all that I know, what would you recommend for file recovery if I plug the USB drive into my Centos 6 laptop? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] qlogic installer
arrrgh, I'm trying to install the QLogic Linux Super Installer on a CentOS 6.4 server that has a QL2532, and getting... # ./qlinstall -i #*# #HBA/CNAs Driver Installer for Linux # # Installer Version: 2.2 # #*# Kernel version: 2.6.32-358.6.1.el6.x86_64 Distribution: CentOS release 6.4 (Final) Found following QLogic Adapter in the system 1. ISP2532 DISTRO : . Cannot determine the Redhat release wtf. oh geez, I had to edit redhat-release to say Red Hat Enterprise Server instead of CentOS, becuase they were pulling the version number from it positionally. yeesh. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Need a Centos 6 USB hard drive recovery procedure
John R Pierce wrote: > On 5/9/2013 1:41 PM, Rock wrote: >> Since none of the files were deleted or written over, is >> there a method on Linux that will simply recover the missing >> file allocation directory structure instead of dumping a >> hundred thousand files into a single directory? > > the FAT contains all the file linkage. if it was overwritten, then > there's no file structure left at all on the disk. > Are you sure that the FAT was mangled, and not just the MBR? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Need a Centos 6 USB hard drive recovery procedure
On 5/9/2013 1:41 PM, Rock wrote: > Since none of the files were deleted or written over, is > there a method on Linux that will simply recover the missing > file allocation directory structure instead of dumping a > hundred thousand files into a single directory? the FAT contains all the file linkage. if it was overwritten, then there's no file structure left at all on the disk. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Need a Centos 6 USB hard drive recovery procedure
My 15GB backup USB drive somehow got "corrupted" such that a "chkdsk /f E:" on WinXP removed the file allocation table (or whatever) making the NTFS drive appear empty. I tried Windows Recuva freeware to recover the files, and it has been working for 24 hours; but it has dumped about 65,000 files into a separate flat Windows directory. http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/12892041/img/12892041.jpg Since none of the files were deleted or written over, is there a method on Linux that will simply recover the missing file allocation directory structure instead of dumping a hundred thousand files into a single directory? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What is the recommended method to obtain Pan 0.136+ (with SSL) for Centos 6?
On Thu, 09 May 2013 11:55:58 +0200, Louis Lagendijk wrote: > Right, it requires glib2(-devel) >= 2.26.0 and gmime(-devel) >= 2.5.5 > You're in for a lot of work as at least the dependency on glib 2.26 is > real I'm really no good at compiling unless all I have to do is issue the make command. So, maybe I'll have to hold off on compiling Pan 0.136 with stunnel... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What is the recommended method to obtain Pan 0.136+ (with SSL) for Centos 6?
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 23:42 +0100, Nux! wrote: > On 08.05.2013 21:26, Rock wrote: > > Q: What is the recommended method to obtain Pan 0.136+ (with SSL) for > > Centos 6? > > Your best bet is run the Windows installer in wine. Natively is very > difficult to run because it requires stuff that's too new to be found in > EL6. :) > That or find an alternative to Pan. > > -- Right, it requires glib2(-devel) >= 2.26.0 and gmime(-devel) >= 2.5.5 You're in for a lot of work as at least the dependency on glib 2.26 is real Louis ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Missing printer driver
On 05/09/2013 03:29 AM, Steve Blackwell wrote: > Lexmark 2600 Download this driver : http://downloads.lexmark.com/downloads/cpd/lexmark-inkjet-08-driver-1.0-1.i386.rpm.sh.zip It is intended for Fedora 12, but should work for EL6 as well. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
