On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 18:17, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How did you recreate the same partitioning ? Informations from my
>> fdisk -l /dev/mmcblk0 before the corruption will be enough to recreate
>> it the same way ?
>
> yupp. just make sure you use "blocks" as unit.
>
ok it works.
> How did you recreate the same partitioning ? Informations from my
> fdisk -l /dev/mmcblk0 before the corruption will be enough to recreate
> it the same way ?
yupp. just make sure you use "blocks" as unit.
___
Openmoko community mailing list
community
> did you still want to know about my kernel? was my information enough /
> usefull?
nope -- the funny part happens when suspending/resuming. since you don't
do that, there's no need.
___
Openmoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
ht
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 17:26, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Anyway my partition table is now crashed thanks to suspend/resume issue.
>> I go digging in mailing list, I think I saw ways to recover... else
>> I'll have to start from 0...
>
> any linux distribution should offer tools to r
> in case you loose it again, do
>
> dd if=boot.backup of=/dev/mmcblk0
>
> that's on your host! i don't know, if that works from fr, though.
>
>
I can confirm this works for the bootsector corruption, but after seriously
struggling with unreadable SDHC cards under Ubuntu _AND_ the FR I finally
figu
arne anka wrote:
>> "fine" means "with no troubles" ;)
>>
>> - bootsector corruption? I haven't tried booting off it yet
>>
>
> that's not necessary -- it manifest itself by total loss partition
> informations
>
aah. Well, no trouble with that then. :)
did you still want to know about my
> "fine" means "with no troubles" ;)
>
> - bootsector corruption? I haven't tried booting off it yet
that's not necessary -- it manifest itself by total loss partition
informations
> - I've not seen any data corruption
> - I usually have power management turned off, because I don't trust it
ok
> Anyway my partition table is now crashed thanks to suspend/resume issue.
> I go digging in mailing list, I think I saw ways to recover... else
> I'll have to start from 0...
any linux distribution should offer tools to recover lost partitions and
recreate partitiontables.
i think parted is o
Fox Mulder wrote:
> Nobody can say exactly if 8GB cards are supported or not because there
> exists no bigger cards to try with. ;)
>
aha, thanks for clarifying :)
___
Openmoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
http://lists.openmoko.
arne anka wrote:
>> I have a sandisk 8gb card, and it works just fine. I seem to recall
>> reading somewhere that 8gb was the biggest a FR could handle? or was it
>> that 8gb is the biggest that is known to work?
>>
>
> what means "fine" exactly?
> - no bootsector corruption?
> - no sudden dat
I could recover the data by creating the same paritioning and then
re-downloading the kernel in the first partition (one of teh post suggested
that the bug actually eats up a sector from the first partition as wellI
didn't check and downloading the kernel was pretty easy).
--Vikas
On Wed, Aug
Thanks !
Anyway my partition table is now crashed thanks to suspend/resume issue.
I go digging in mailing list, I think I saw ways to recover... else
I'll have to start from 0...
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 16:05, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * can I change this table order without losi
> * can I change this table order without losing partition data ?
nope.
> * can I have Extended partition number (mmcblk0p3 now) to be after the
> logical ones (so that mmcnlk0p2 and mmcblk0p3 refer to the 2 first
> logical ones, -just the same as in my 512MB card-) ?
nope. the logicla partitio
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:41, Cédric Berger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 10:25, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> what means "fine" exactly?
>> - no bootsector corruption?
>> - no sudden data corruption?
>> - lost card on resume?
>>
>> if so, which kernel are you u
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:50, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> by repartitioning -- but first you better post the output of
>
> fdisk -l /dev/mmcblk0
>
result of fdisk -l /dev/mmcblk0 (from 2007.2 booted from NAND ):
"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# fdisk -l /dev/mmcblk0
Disk /dev/mmcblk0: 8168 MB
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:28, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> no, it's not. but your description is rather confusting:
> 1 primary fat
> 5 extended ext3
> 1 primary ext3
>
> i can't quite imagine how your partition table looks like.
>
5 logical.
Here I only have pc on windows : as seen on X
> I will look at this...
> (Well here I used GUI appli from ubuntu (gparted ?) to partition. Can
> I use this appli to change this ?)
of course, fdisk -l prints only the partition table.
> 1st partition is primary FAT
> then extended partition with 5 (!) ext3 logical partitions.
> and last one is
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:50, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 1 4gb FAT partition with the uImage.bin (one for each other partition)
>
> why is that?
> 4gb just to host the kernels is ... waste.
Of course, it is my data partition (maps,). But for now, I also
use it for the kernel, did
arne anka wrote:
>> 1 4gb FAT partition with the uImage.bin (one for each other partition)
>
> why is that?
> 4gb just to host the kernels is ... waste.
I think he means the root filesystem. ;)
>> But I have now more partitions (and these 2 ext3 ones are logical
>> ones now, and recognized a
> 1 4gb FAT partition with the uImage.bin (one for each other partition)
why is that?
4gb just to host the kernels is ... waste.
> But I have now more partitions (and these 2 ext3 ones are logical
> ones now, and recognized as mmcblk0p5 and mmcblk0p6 instead of
> mmcblk0p2 and mmcblk0p3 befor
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 10:25, arne anka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have a sandisk 8gb card, and it works just fine. I seem to recall
>> reading somewhere that 8gb was the biggest a FR could handle? or was it
>> that 8gb is the biggest that is known to work?
>
> what means "fine" exactly?
> -
> I have a sandisk 8gb card, and it works just fine. I seem to recall
> reading somewhere that 8gb was the biggest a FR could handle? or was
> it that 8gb is the biggest that is known to work?
Or wasn't it, that it's the biggest micro SD card that exists on the
market as of now?
Nobody can say exactly if 8GB cards are supported or not because there
exists no bigger cards to try with. ;)
Dale Maggee wrote:
> Mikko Rauhala wrote:
>> ti, 2008-08-19 kello 18:06 -0400, Geoff Ruscoe kirjoitti:
>>
>>> I am looking to upgrade my Micro SDHC card and I found:
>>> a 16GB Sandisk
> I have a sandisk 8gb card, and it works just fine. I seem to recall
> reading somewhere that 8gb was the biggest a FR could handle? or was it
> that 8gb is the biggest that is known to work?
what means "fine" exactly?
- no bootsector corruption?
- no sudden data corruption?
- lost card on resume
Mikko Rauhala wrote:
> ti, 2008-08-19 kello 18:06 -0400, Geoff Ruscoe kirjoitti:
>
>> I am looking to upgrade my Micro SDHC card and I found:
>> a 16GB Sandisk w / 15MB/s speeds. This sounded like a winner to me,
>> but I wasn't sure if it would work.
>>
>> The model number is: SDSDRH-016G-A11
ti, 2008-08-19 kello 18:06 -0400, Geoff Ruscoe kirjoitti:
> I am looking to upgrade my Micro SDHC card and I found:
> a 16GB Sandisk w / 15MB/s speeds. This sounded like a winner to me,
> but I wasn't sure if it would work.
>
> The model number is: SDSDRH-016G-A11
Googling this model number finds
Am Mittwoch 20 August 2008 00:06:28 schrieb Geoff Ruscoe:
> I am looking to upgrade my Micro SDHC card and I found:
>
> a 16GB Sandisk w / 15MB/s speeds. This sounded like a winner to me, but I
> wasn't sure if it would work.
>
> The model number is:
>
> SDSDRH-016G-A11
>
> Can someone tell me whe
27 matches
Mail list logo
