[lfs-support] Creating the /etc/fstab File
Linux From Scratch - Version 7.3 Chapter 8. Making the LFS System Bootable 8.2. Creating the /etc/fstab File --- sda1 Boot Primary vfat - Unusable - sda2 Primary ext4 - Logical Free Space- sda5 NC Logical ext4 - sda6 NC Logical swap - sda4 Primary ext3 - --- Kernel panic, probably it's from fstab file. I just rebuild again, please create fstab file for me, the sda4 is lfs partition. Please help anyone FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Creating the /etc/fstab File
Go to the Gentoo or Arch Linux web sight they have info on how to create the /etc/fstab file. You won't learn much by having someone do it for you. On Jun 11, 2013 9:46 PM, John Black j...@inbox.com wrote: Linux From Scratch - Version 7.3 Chapter 8. Making the LFS System Bootable 8.2. Creating the /etc/fstab File --- sda1 Boot Primary vfat - Unusable - sda2 Primary ext4 - Logical Free Space- sda5 NC Logical ext4 - sda6 NC Logical swap - sda4 Primary ext3 - --- Kernel panic, probably it's from fstab file. I just rebuild again, please create fstab file for me, the sda4 is lfs partition. Please help anyone FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Creating the /etc/fstab File
On Jun 11, 2013, at 9:45 PM, John Black wrote: Kernel panic, probably it's from fstab file. Kernel panics don't know about /etc/fstab. Kernel panics mean that you don't have the proper drivers in the running kernel. If it is a vfs issue about mounting root fs and unknown block-device (0,0) or (2,0) I suggest you build the required drivers to mount the rootfs into the kernel: hard drive controller driver filesystem driver Please read the LFS FAQ, it explains it. Sincerely, William Harrington-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Creating the /etc/fstab File
-Original Message-From: kb0...@berzerkula.orgSent: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 22:13:58 -0500To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.orgSubject: Re: [lfs-support] Creating the /etc/fstab FileOn Jun 11, 2013, at 9:45 PM, John Black wrote:Kernel panic, probably it's from fstab file.Kernel panics don't know about /etc/fstab.Kernel panics mean that you don't have the proper drivers in the running kernel.If it is a vfs issue about mounting root fs and unknown block-device (0,0) or (2,0) I suggest you build the required drivers to mount the rootfs into the kernel:hard drive controller driverfilesystem driverPlease read the LFS FAQ, it explains it.Sincerely,William HarringtonI build LFS 3 times with 3 different distro. I'm so confused, thank you Mr. Harrington. Free 3D Marine Aquarium Screensaver Watch dolphins, sharks orcas on your desktop! Check it out at www.inbox.com/marineaquarium -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Creating the /etc/fstab File
-Original Message-From: kb0...@berzerkula.orgSent: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 22:13:58 -0500To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.orgSubject: Re: [lfs-support] Creating the /etc/fstab FileOn Jun 11, 2013, at 9:45 PM, John Black wrote:Kernel panic, probably it's from fstab file.Kernel panics don't know about /etc/fstab.Kernel panics mean that you don't have the proper drivers in the running kernel.If it is a vfs issue about mounting root fs and unknown block-device (0,0) or (2,0) I suggest you build the required drivers to mount the rootfs into the kernel:hard drive controller driverfilesystem driverPlease read the LFS FAQ, it explains it.Sincerely,William HarringtonI build LFS 3 times with 3 different distro. I'm so confused, thank you Mr. Harrington. Free 3D Earth Screensaver Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at www.inbox.com/earth -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[lfs-support] 8.2. Creating the /etc/fstab File
I found this error in the book It is possible to make the ext3 filesystem reliable across power failures for some hard disk types. To do this, add the barrier=1 mount option to the appropriate entry in /etc/fstab. To check if the disk drive supports this option, run hdparm on the applicable disk drive. For example, if: The ext3 should be ext4 if this is the default for LFS should it not? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] 8.2. Creating the /etc/fstab File
Baho Utot wrote: I found this error in the book It is possible to make the ext3 filesystem reliable across power failures for some hard disk types. To do this, add the barrier=1 mount option to the appropriate entry in /etc/fstab. To check if the disk drive supports this option, run hdparm on the applicable disk drive. For example, if: The ext3 should be ext4 if this is the default for LFS should it not? The statement is still valid for for both ext3 and ext4. Using barrier=1 may also affect disk speed, but I suspect that's more theoretical than noticeable. There are other options that may be useful that we don't mention. For example noatime,discard,data=writeback is useful for ssd drives. Perhaps a more general statement about mount options would be more appropriate than a mention of just barrier. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] /etc/fstab
Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
I'd appreciate it if somebody could please have a look at my /etc/fstab
file shown below and let me know if it's OK. I've searched this mailing
list's archives and an example /etc/fstab I found was a bit different to
mine. I also had a look at the /etc/fstab files on a Ubuntu and Debian
systems, but they weren't as detailed as mine.
In particular, I'd like to know whether it is my /boot partition or /
partition that has to be checked by fsck. Is it OK for /boot to be ext3,
or should I have made it ext2? Googling it suggests that it's probably
better for it to be ext2, but ext3 should do fine as well.
The /boot partition is rarely written. The purpose of a journaled file
system is to recover written data in a cache that is in the journal an
not properly committed to the disk in the case of a power/system failure.
Making /boot ext3 is OK, but it really doesn't add anything significant
to the system.
:; mount
...
/dev/sda5 on /mnt/lfs/boot type ext3 (rw)
/dev/sda6 on /mnt/lfs type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda7 on /mnt/lfs/opt type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda8 on /mnt/lfs/usr/src type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda9 on /mnt/lfs/home type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev on /mnt/lfs/dev type none (rw,bind)
devpts on /mnt/lfs/dev/pts type devpts (rw)
shm on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw)
proc on /mnt/lfs/proc type proc (rw)
sysfs on /mnt/lfs/sys type sysfs (rw)
root@hostname:~# file -s /dev/sda[5-9] | awk '{ print $1,$8 }'
/dev/sda5: UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585
/dev/sda6: UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743
/dev/sda7: UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164
/dev/sda8: UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d
/dev/sda9: UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1
An interesting alternative to dumpe2fs.
root:/# cat /etc/fstab
# Begin /etc/fstab
# file system mount point type options dump pass
UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585 /boot ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743 / ext3 defaults 0 1
UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164 /opt ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d /usr/src ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1 /home ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=c0882b91-9df5-43f9-b5e3-d77d68b53a33 none swap sw 0 0
proc /proc proc nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0
sysfs /sys sysfs nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=4,mode=620 0 0
tmpfs /run tmpfs defaults 0 0
devtmpfs /dev devtmpfs mode=0755,nosuid 0 0
As Ken said, the UUIDs are meaningless until udev is started. Since
that's pretty early in the boot process, this should work fine. Note
that you cannot use UUIDs in the GRUB linux line unless you use an initrd.
My partition allocation is almost the same as yours. Unlike others, I
do like to put some things on /opt (Xorg, KDE, Qt, JDK, others).
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] /etc/fstab
On 06/26/2012 10:18 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: The /boot partition is rarely written. The purpose of a journaled file system is to recover written data in a cache that is in the journal an not properly committed to the disk in the case of a power/system failure. Making /boot ext3 is OK, but it really doesn't add anything significant to the system. Understood. Thanks. As Ken said, the UUIDs are meaningless until udev is started. Since that's pretty early in the boot process, this should work fine. Note that you cannot use UUIDs in the GRUB linux line unless you use an initrd. My partition allocation is almost the same as yours. Unlike others, I do like to put some things on /opt (Xorg, KDE, Qt, JDK, others). -- Bruce Got it. Thanks. I've modified my /etc/fstab file as suggested by Ken. Compiling the kernel now. Alexander. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] /etc/fstab
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.comwrote: ext3 should be ok for /boot. fsck will be run on *all* the filesystems in fstab which are automounted and in need of an fsck. Understood. Thanks. Thanks, I didn't know that file could do that! No worries. I didn't know that file could be that either, until I stumbled upon it the other day myself while looking for way to get UUIDs for devices. Why not just use /dev/sda5 /boot ext3 ... and similarly for the others ? I suppose that UUID will work once udev is running. For the rootfs, the kernel will try to use whatever root= you passed on the commandline from grub : here UUID will NOT work (we don't use an initrd) - and what is shown in /etc/fstab for '/' is at best documentation. While reading the man page for fstab(5), I got the impression that using UUIDs was the preferred method of defining devices. Based on your advice, I'll use the /dev/sdaN notation instead. I also think that /usr/src and /opt are wastes of filesystems : This is my first time building LFS, so I followed the disk partitioning suggestions found here, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter02/creatingpartition.html. For the sake of not having to go back to re-partitioning my hard drive and rebuilding the user land utilities, I'll get on with the book using the current disk layout. I would consider using a different layout in future. Thanks. Alexander. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] /etc/fstab
I'd appreciate it if somebody could please have a look at my /etc/fstab
file shown below and let me know if it's OK. I've searched this mailing
list's archives and an example /etc/fstab I found was a bit different to
mine. I also had a look at the /etc/fstab files on a Ubuntu and Debian
systems, but they weren't as detailed as mine.
In particular, I'd like to know whether it is my /boot partition or /
partition that has to be checked by fsck. Is it OK for /boot to be ext3,
or should I have made it ext2? Googling it suggests that it's probably
better for it to be ext2, but ext3 should do fine as well.
:; mount
...
/dev/sda5 on /mnt/lfs/boot type ext3 (rw)
/dev/sda6 on /mnt/lfs type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda7 on /mnt/lfs/opt type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda8 on /mnt/lfs/usr/src type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda9 on /mnt/lfs/home type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev on /mnt/lfs/dev type none (rw,bind)
devpts on /mnt/lfs/dev/pts type devpts (rw)
shm on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw)
proc on /mnt/lfs/proc type proc (rw)
sysfs on /mnt/lfs/sys type sysfs (rw)
root@hostname:~# file -s /dev/sda[5-9] | awk '{ print $1,$8 }'
/dev/sda5: UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585
/dev/sda6: UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743
/dev/sda7: UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164
/dev/sda8: UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d
/dev/sda9: UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1
root:/# cat /etc/fstab
# Begin /etc/fstab
# file system mount point type options dump pass
UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585 /boot ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743 / ext3 defaults 0 1
UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164 /opt ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d /usr/src ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1 /home ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=c0882b91-9df5-43f9-b5e3-d77d68b53a33 none swap sw 0 0
proc /proc proc nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0
sysfs /sys sysfs nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=4,mode=620 0 0
tmpfs /run tmpfs defaults 0 0
devtmpfs /dev devtmpfs mode=0755,nosuid 0 0
# End /etc/fstab
Thanks.
Alexander Kapshuk.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] /etc/fstab
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 09:27:03PM +0300, Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
I'd appreciate it if somebody could please have a look at my /etc/fstab
file shown below and let me know if it's OK. I've searched this mailing
list's archives and an example /etc/fstab I found was a bit different to
mine. I also had a look at the /etc/fstab files on a Ubuntu and Debian
systems, but they weren't as detailed as mine.
In particular, I'd like to know whether it is my /boot partition or /
partition that has to be checked by fsck. Is it OK for /boot to be ext3,
or should I have made it ext2? Googling it suggests that it's probably
better for it to be ext2, but ext3 should do fine as well.
ext3 should be ok for /boot. fsck will be run on *all* the
filesystems in fstab which are automounted and in need of an fsck.
:; mount
...
/dev/sda5 on /mnt/lfs/boot type ext3 (rw)
/dev/sda6 on /mnt/lfs type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda7 on /mnt/lfs/opt type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda8 on /mnt/lfs/usr/src type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev/sda9 on /mnt/lfs/home type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0)
/dev on /mnt/lfs/dev type none (rw,bind)
devpts on /mnt/lfs/dev/pts type devpts (rw)
shm on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw)
proc on /mnt/lfs/proc type proc (rw)
sysfs on /mnt/lfs/sys type sysfs (rw)
root@hostname:~# file -s /dev/sda[5-9] | awk '{ print $1,$8 }'
/dev/sda5: UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585
/dev/sda6: UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743
/dev/sda7: UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164
/dev/sda8: UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d
/dev/sda9: UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1
Thanks, I didn't know that file could do that!
root:/# cat /etc/fstab
# Begin /etc/fstab
# file system mount point type options dump pass
UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585 /boot ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743 / ext3 defaults 0 1
UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164 /opt ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d /usr/src ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1 /home ext3 defaults 0 2
UUID=c0882b91-9df5-43f9-b5e3-d77d68b53a33 none swap sw 0 0
Why not just use /dev/sda5 /boot ext3 ... and similarly for the
others ? I suppose that UUID will work once udev is running. For
the rootfs, the kernel will try to use whatever root= you passed on
the commandline from grub : here UUID will NOT work (we don't use an
initrd) - and what is shown in /etc/fstab for '/' is at best
documentation.
Dump values of '1' are, or at least used to be, conventional for
ext filesystems, but that probably doesn't make any real difference.
So, I *think* that your fstab will probably work.
I also think that /usr/src and /opt are wastes of filesystems :
Anything you build in /opt will be linked to the libraries in /lib
and therefore might break work when you build your next LFS
because the versions will probably change. At the moment, the only
thing in /opt on my current system is llvm -
ken@ac4tv ~ $ldd /opt/llvm/lib/libLLVM-3.1.so
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x74fff000)
libpthread.so.0 = /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x7fb9be449000)
libffi.so.5 = /usr/lib/libffi.so.5 (0x7fb9be24)
libdl.so.2 = /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x7fb9be03c000)
libstdc++.so.6 = /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x7fb9bdd3b000)
libm.so.6 = /lib/libm.so.6 (0x7fb9bda3f000)
libgcc_s.so.1 = /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x7fb9bd82a000)
libc.so.6 = /lib/libc.so.6 (0x7fb9bd46d000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7fb9bfbbc000)
libpthread, libdl, libm libc, and even ld-linux are the things
which might break with a newer glibc. OTOH, those people who update
glibc in-place can probably handle this. I also believe that if I'm
going to install a new system, I want the current versions of
everything - not a version from whenever I installed the current
system.
The case against /usr/src is different : you can build packages
anywhere that there is enough space - on recent disks I dedicate a
large space to /scratch (it doesn't get backed up) and build within
that. On my previous smaller disks I used to build in /home (ok,
for scripted installss I have built in /usr/src if there was room,
and still use /mnt/lfs/usr/src, but it doesn't require a separate
partition).
Many desktop packages use a lot of space, but there is usually no
good reason to keep the build director{y,ies} around after a package
is installed.
Since I'm off on my partitioning hobbyhorse, I'll mention that
people who intend to keep using LFS will want a second filesystem to
use as /mnt/lfs for their next build. For many people, '/' from
their original host system can be used for that. Other approaches
are possible, but life is hard enough for those of us who build from
source, no need to gratuitously make things harder for ourselves.
proc /proc proc nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0
sysfs /sys sysfs nosuid
Re: quot;autoquot; in /etc/fstab
--- Original Message --- From: rhubarbpie...@gmail.com[mailto:rhubarbpie...@gmail.com] Sent: 10/10/2010 11:12:48 AM To : rhubarb...@poetworld.net Cc : Subject : FW: Re: FW: Re: auto in /etc/fstab On 10/10/2010 01:05 PM, rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: --- Original Message --- From: Bruce Dubbs[ mailto:bruce.du...@gmail.com ] Sent: 10/9/2010 7:36:52 PM To : lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org Cc : Subject : FW: Re: auto in /etc/fstab If you know what the filesystem is, there is no reason not to specify it. -- Bruce I recently restored an imaged partition to a different file system. Had I listed its file type as auto in /etc/fstab ... Even if I know what the file system is, I see no reason to specify it. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: quot;autoquot; in /etc/fstab
On Monday 11 October 2010 07:56:17 rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: --- Original Message --- From: rhubarbpie...@gmail.com[mailto:rhubarbpie...@gmail.com] Sent: 10/10/2010 11:12:48 AM To : rhubarb...@poetworld.net Cc : Subject : FW: Re: FW: Re: auto in /etc/fstab On 10/10/2010 01:05 PM, rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: --- Original Message --- From: Bruce Dubbs[ mailto:bruce.du...@gmail.com ] Sent: 10/9/2010 7:36:52 PM To : lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org Cc : Subject : FW: Re: auto in /etc/fstab If you know what the filesystem is, there is no reason not to specify it. -- Bruce I recently restored an imaged partition to a different file system. Had I listed its file type as auto in /etc/fstab ... Even if I know what the file system is, I see no reason to specify it. Binutils are getting better at recognizing a filesystem and loading its module(s) as needed before mounting it; it wasn't always thus. Regardless of that, there are two consumers of /etc/fstab: the computer, and the admin; it needs to be computer parsable and human grokable. I'll side more with Bruce on this one. (1) Fstab is where I usually 'document' which partitions have which filesystems. (2) I sometimes need to specify mount options; NTFS options don't work with reiserFS and reiserFS options don't work with vfat, etc. (3) Even if I know what the FS is, there's no guarantee I'll remember it in 6 months. Something like the following works well enough for me. Depending on the FS, a partition will be mounted on different dirs and/or have different mount options: /dev/sdh1 /mntntfs-3g rw,user,noauto,allow_other,default_permissions,\ umask=000,dmask=000,fmask=111 0 0 /dev/sdh1 /media/usb1 autorw,user,noauto -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: quot;autoquot; in /etc/fstab
On 10/11/2010 08:39 AM, Neal Murphy wrote: Binutils are getting better at recognizing a filesystem and loading its module(s) as needed before mounting it; it wasn't always thus. Regardless of that, there are two consumers of /etc/fstab: the computer, and the admin; it needs to be computer parsable and human grokable. I'll side more with Bruce on this one. (1) Fstab is where I usually 'document' which partitions have which filesystems. (2) I sometimes need to specify mount options; NTFS options don't work with reiserFS and reiserFS options don't work with vfat, etc. (3) Even if I know what the FS is, there's no guarantee I'll remember it in 6 months. Something like the following works well enough for me. Depending on the FS, a partition will be mounted on different dirs and/or have different mount options: /dev/sdh1 /mntntfs-3g rw,user,noauto,allow_other,default_permissions,\ umask=000,dmask=000,fmask=111 0 0 /dev/sdh1 /media/usb1 autorw,user,noauto Thank you for responding. I'd thought of the documentation argument. However, even though I have auto for each partition in my /etc/fstab, mount or df -T tells me the file system type. True, that doesn't apply to the / partition, but that's not a problem for me. Jonathan suggested auto isn't a good idea with network drives. I'll buy that. Your /etc/fstab example is good. I used something similar, but less sophisticated, before I began using auto. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: auto in /etc/fstab
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 16:18:30 -0500 rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: Is there a disadvantage of using auto for file system type in the /etc/fstab file? I have three non-swap partitions. Why not list them all as auto? About the only reason you wouldn't have something set to be auto is if it were a network drive and you only wanted to load it on demand and not slow down starutp by waiting for it to mount, esp. if it wasn't available. I don't think there is any reason to not have auto for a local filesystem. -- Jonathan ArnoldWebstream: http://hieronymus.soup.io Being a goaltender is not a job that would interest any normal, straight-thinking human. -- Gump Worsley -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: auto in /etc/fstab
Jonathan Arnold wrote: On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 16:18:30 -0500 rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: Is there a disadvantage of using auto for file system type in the /etc/fstab file? I have three non-swap partitions. Why not list them all as auto? About the only reason you wouldn't have something set to be auto is if it were a network drive and you only wanted to load it on demand and not slow down starutp by waiting for it to mount, esp. if it wasn't available. I don't think there is any reason to not have auto for a local filesystem. If you know what the filesystem is, there is no reason not to specify it. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: auto in /etc/fstab
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:18 -0500, rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: Is there a disadvantage of using auto for file system type in the /etc/fstab file? I have three non-swap partitions. Why not list them all as auto? I may be wrong, but I *think* auto works only for filesystems that are registered at the time you try to mount them - in other words, if your filesystem support is built as a loadable module, it may not work. I remember having issues of this kind while playing with initramfs support ages ago... Simon. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
auto in /etc/fstab
Is there a disadvantage of using auto for file system type in the /etc/fstab file? I have three non-swap partitions. Why not list them all as auto? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: auto in /etc/fstab
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:18 PM, rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: Is there a disadvantage of using auto for file system type in the /etc/fstab file? I have three non-swap partitions. Why not list them all as auto? I don't really know the answer to your question but if it's of interest then here is how I set up 3 swap partitions on one of my machines at home: /dev/sda1 /boot ext2noauto,noatime 1 2 /dev/md5/ ext3noatime 0 1 /dev/sda2 noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/sdb2 noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/sdc2 noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom autonoauto,ro,users 0 0 #/dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy autonoauto 0 0 /dev/md11 /virdataext3auto0 0 /dev/md6/backupsext3auto,rw,users 0 0 /dev/sdf1 /mnt/WinMount vfatnoauto,rw,users 0 0 This machine is sort of weird in that I'm not very RAID experienced. sda5/sdb5/sdc5 are RAID1 assembled as md5 The boot partition is not RAID. I just put the kernel on all 3 partitions but only called out sda1 here. sdb1 sdc1 have the kernel also. If the boot partition goes down I'll chroot into the RAID and fix grub from there. sda2/sdb2/sdc2 are all 4GB swap partitions giving me 12GB swap. top shows 12GB memory, 12GB swap and 12 processors: top - 15:50:03 up 7 min, 3 users, load average: 0.78, 0.46, 0.20 Tasks: 223 total, 1 running, 222 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu0 : 1.0%us, 1.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 29.9%id, 67.4%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.3%si, 0.0%st Cpu1 : 1.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 98.7%id, 0.3%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu2 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu3 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu4 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu5 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu6 : 0.7%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 97.7%id, 1.3%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu7 : 0.0%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.3%id, 0.3%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu8 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.2%id, 0.8%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu9 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.3%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu10 : 0.0%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu11 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 12303144k total, 529176k used, 11773968k free,16428k buffers Swap: 12602976k total,0k used, 12602976k free, 217544k cached 529MB to run KDE. Same machine uses over 1GB to run Win 7. Hope this helps, Mark -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: auto in /etc/fstab
On 09/30/2010 07:52 PM, Mark Knecht wrote: On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:18 PM,rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote: Is there a disadvantage of using auto for file system type in the /etc/fstab file? I have three non-swap partitions. Why not list them all as auto? That's a good question... But since all the filesystem partitions that I use for most of my Linux systems are ext3, the potential risks overcome any benefit. One thing that I use, though, is the argument LABEL instead of UUID or the absolute path for a partition. It gives flexibility and assures me that even if I change my disks order, I will not have to worry about it. Most popular distros use UUID, but this changes every time you re-format. Label too, but it's much more simple to format as LABEL=LFS-HOME e.g. than re-specify the very long UUID number that your partition had. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Setting up /etc/fstab
Ok, I built my system on an external drive. It has two partitions, busically I split a 1.5 TB right down the middle. I used the 2nd partition for the build. I have not reached the grub section yet. What my intention was to modify my existing grub to point to the partition with LFS on it and boot. So I am at the point to create /etc/fstab and its looking for the root partition and swap devices. Here are my present two lines for the root and swap on Centos: /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 / ext3defaults 1 1 /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01 swap swapdefaults 0 0 and my present LFS partition: /dev/sdc2 /mnt/lfs ext3defaults 1 5 I am not sure that after booting the current '/' and swap will be recognized as they are now. Or if /mnt/lfs will be recognized as /dev/sdc2. If they are, I can set up the LFS fstab. Has anyone tried a similar setup? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 18:34:48 +0100 Clemens Haupt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Clemens, I realise that you are helping another German speaker. However this list is English. If you give him bad advice we can't correct it if we didn't understand it. Please stick to English on the lists and mail Niki privately in German if you wish. Thanks for trying to help though, R. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
Dan Nicholson wrote: On 1/26/06, Matt Darcy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I boot into my LFS host distro (Slack 10.2). Warning - Slackware 10 has problems acting as a build host. For your first build you may want to consider a better host distro He's using Slack 10.2. Why is that a problem? I've never heard this before. -- Dan Slack's just been know to behave badly with certain package versions/configs (can't remember them off the top of my head) -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
/mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
Hi, I just got my build and LFS environment OK. For the moment I try to keep things simple, so there's one big /dev/hda6 partition formatted in ext2. I put $LFS in .bashrc so that it is always set. (Whenever I have some spare time, I reboot on my LFS partition and work on it for a bit.) To get more comfortable, I want to put /dev/hda6 in /etc/fstab, so it is automatically mounted every time I boot into my LFS host distro (Slack 10.2). I have this, so far: /dev/hda6/mnt/lfsext2 defaults* * Question: what shall I put in place of the asterisks? Some entries do have 0, 1 or 2 value. I don't know what these mean. Are they of any importance? Thanks, Niki Kovacs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
I boot into my LFS host distro (Slack 10.2). Warning - Slackware 10 has problems acting as a build host. For your first build you may want to consider a better host distro /dev/hda6/mnt/lfsext2 defaults* * Question: what shall I put in place of the asterisks? Some entries do have 0, 1 or 2 value. I don't know what these mean. Are they of any importance? man fstab -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
Le Jeudi 26 Janvier 2006 11:41, Matt Darcy a écrit : Warning - Slackware 10 has problems acting as a build host. For your first build you may want to consider a better host distro Humm. I spent the best part of the morning installing a comfortable build host. Anybody on the list tried to build LFS 6.1.1 with a Slack 10.2 host? If you think it's risky, I'd better switch to something known to work. Unfortunately I'm on dialup, but let's see. My CD cardboard box offers a Debian Sarge distro, complete on DVD or 14-CD set. Would you recommend that more as a build host? Cheers, Niki Kovacs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
On 1/26/06, Matt Darcy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I boot into my LFS host distro (Slack 10.2). Warning - Slackware 10 has problems acting as a build host. For your first build you may want to consider a better host distro He's using Slack 10.2. Why is that a problem? I've never heard this before. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
Quoting Dan Nicholson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Warning - Slackware 10 has problems acting as a build host. For your first build you may want to consider a better host distro He's using Slack 10.2. Why is that a problem? I've never heard this before. Well, although I really like Slack 10.2 as an everyday distro, I'm not particularly anal about using it as a host system. After reading various messages in the mailing list archives, I reckon the choice of a host system is the first crucial decision, since some distributions seem to be a problem here. What I'd like eventually is a basic One-CD-distro that builds LFS out of the box. I know that there is a LiveCD, but I'll often reboot during breaks to do 30 minutes or an hour of LFS there and then, and I think a host system installed on hard disk would come in more handy than a LiveCD where I have to reconfigure xorg.conf after every reboot. (Or can the LiveCD be installed on a hard disk?) Besides, I reckon a LiveCD eats up some resources, at least RAM. Correct me if I'm wrong here. Precious resources needed for compiling. Now I wonder how Debian Sarge qualifies as host distro for LFS 6.1.1.. Takes 10 to 15 minutes to install and configure on a modern system, plus I already have the CDs. (Please don't say Ubuntu. Ubuntu hates my hardware, and I hate Ubuntu/o|) Anyone has experience with that? Cheers, Niki -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
On 1/26/06, Luca Dionisi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Dan Nicholson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Well, although I really like Slack 10.2 as an everyday distro, I'm not particularly anal about using it as a host system. After reading various IMHO, you can have a try using your Slack as a host system, if you don't feel well with the LiveCD. Just guessing here, though. I wouldn't be scared to use Slackware at all. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
On Thursday 26 January 2006 11:34, you wrote: I just got my build and LFS environment OK. For the moment I try to keep things simple, so there's one big /dev/hda6 partition formatted in ext2. I put $LFS in .bashrc so that it is always set. (Whenever I have some spare time, I reboot on my LFS partition and work on it for a bit.) Das find ich nicht so gut, ich hab's ausprobiert, weil sich die meisten Befehle im Buch auf $LFS beziehen und das soll /mnt/lfs sein. Irgendwo hakelt es früher oder später. To get more comfortable, I want to put /dev/hda6 in /etc/fstab, so it is automatically mounted every time I boot into my LFS host distro (Slack 10.2). I have this, so far /dev/hda6/mnt/lfsext2 defaults* * Jaja, schon klar. Question: what shall I put in place of the asterisks? Nur Nuller! Die Partition soll vom Originalsystem nicht weiß Gott wie geprüft werden, am Besten sie läßt sie vollends in Ruhe Some entries do have 0, 1 or 2 value. I don't know what these mean. Are they of any importance? Aber nein. Thanks, Bittschee -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /mnt/lfs entry in /etc/fstab?
On Thursday 26 January 2006 12:27, you wrote: Le Jeudi 26 Janvier 2006 11:41, Matt Darcy a écrit : Warning - Slackware 10 has problems acting as a build host. For your first build you may want to consider a better host distro Humm. I spent the best part of the morning installing a comfortable build host. Anybody on the list tried to build LFS 6.1.1 with a Slack 10.2 host? Das Problem ist das Dateisystem u. a.. So sauber Slackware auch aufgebaut ist LFS-freundlich ist es nicht besonders. Noch viel schlimmer ist SuSE, auch wenn man dort sich schön langsam auf Empfehlungen einläßt. Aber die Distribution ist schon so aufgeblasen, daß jede Änderung echt viel Arbeit bedeutet. If you think it's risky, I'd better switch to something known to work. Jede funktioniert. Irgendwie. Ganz sicher Unfortunately I'm on dialup, but let's see. My CD cardboard box offers a Debian Sarge distro, complete on DVD or 14-CD set. Would you recommend that more as a build host? Debian kann man vergessen, die meisten Dateien und Pakete sind zwar saustabil und nach allen Regeln der Kunst getestet, aber die LFS ist viel zu neu. Ich hab's aufgegeben, ich will nicht Debial lernen. Ist zu behäbig. Ich hab wen gefunden, weil auch ich Dial On Demand hab, der mir die LiveCD gebrannt hat. Die ist blitzsauber, hinreißend klar, gescheit gestaltet und hat alle schönen Dinge für die Konsole, die man wirklich braucht. Ich konnte perfekt alle Teile der HD einhängen, auch ein NFS, was man aber gut gebrauchen kann ist ein dhcp-server, sonst gibt's am Anfang eine Gemecker. Die CD ist in Deutsch begeisternd! Würd wer auf mich hören, ich wünschte mir, daß Lynx die blöden dotfiles also die ,versteckten' Dateien einschlösse und daß sowas wie mc, oder vielleicht gar ,git' zu finden wär... Ansonsten hat man die perfekte Umgebung mit einer sauberen Partition, das macht Freude, das macht Spaß ;-) In Wien ist der ftpserver der TU-Wien perfekt, sauschnell und man findet dort Herrn Sprinzl, für LFS. Liebenswürdig und freundlich! Cheers, Niki Kovacs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
/etc/fstab
Hello, I hope this question doesn't turn out to be a stupid as my last one but here goes anyway. I hav got to page 103 of the LFS book(6.1) and am mounting the virtual kernel files on the new filesystem with mount -t devpts -o gid=4,mode=620 none /dev/pts I get a warning can't open /etc/fstab: No such file or directory now I don't remember making fstab in a previous section, and wasn't expecting this warning. Is it an expected warning or have I done something wrong? -Ross- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: /etc/fstab
Ross wrote: Hello, I hope this question doesn't turn out to be a stupid as my last one but here goes anyway. I hav got to page 103 of the LFS book(6.1) and am mounting the virtual kernel files on the new filesystem with mount -t devpts -o gid=4,mode=620 none /dev/pts I get a warning can't open /etc/fstab: No such file or directory now I don't remember making fstab in a previous section, and wasn't expecting this warning. Is it an expected warning or have I done something wrong? -Ross- This is mentioned in the book, right below the mount commands. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
