2010/5/1 Polytropon free...@edvax.de
On Sat, 1 May 2010 02:53:13 +0200, Jon Theil Nielsen jonth...@gmail.com
wrote:
But if I look into the source code of bsdlabel
(/usr/src/sbin/bsdlabel/bsdlabel.c), I can see this:
#define MAXPARTITIONS 26
which at least tells me that is has been the
On Saturday 20 March 2010, Mike Clarke wrote:
I'm currently running 8.0-RELEASE and am considering experimenting
with 8.0-STABLE. I'd like to preserve my existing system in case
things go pear-shaped so I'll copy the entire system onto a spare
slice and then use csup to upgrade the copy to
On 31 March 2010 10:22, Mike Clarke jmc-freeb...@milibyte.co.uk wrote:
On Saturday 20 March 2010, Mike Clarke wrote:
I'm currently running 8.0-RELEASE and am considering experimenting
with 8.0-STABLE. I'd like to preserve my existing system in case
things go pear-shaped so I'll copy the
On Wednesday 31 March 2010, krad wrote:
On 31 March 2010 10:22, Mike Clarke jmc-freeb...@milibyte.co.uk
wrote:
On Saturday 20 March 2010, Mike Clarke wrote:
[snip]
I have two 500GB disks, /dev/ad4 and /dev/ad8, each partitioned
into 4 slices of 88, 88, 42 and 259GB. My system is
of unknown territory for me but with 6 partitions on the
slice it does require fewer potentially dangerous manual steps (like
newfs or restore to the wrong device) so looks like an interesting
experiment.
You could perhaps
disconnect one of the hard drive's data cable (same thing). Also,
make
I'm currently running 8.0-RELEASE and am considering experimenting with
8.0-STABLE. I'd like to preserve my existing system in case things go
pear-shaped so I'll copy the entire system onto a spare slice and then
use csup to upgrade the copy to STABLE. Normally I'd go through the
steps of
How valuable is your data?
I recommend you make an offline backup. There's a lot of steps in your
procedure which introduce room for error. You could perhaps disconnect
one of the hard drive's data cable (same thing). Also, make a backup
copy of your geom meta data somewhere.
Other than that,
I've used the syntax
1:ad(1,a)/boot/loader
in boot.config to specify the boot device. This doesn't work with GPT
partitions. What's the correct syntax in boot.config for GPT partitions?
I looked at the source code to boot.c and there doesn't seem to be anything
specifically related to GPT
I've used the syntax
1:ad(1,a)/boot/loader
in boot.config to specify the boot device. This doesn't work with GPT
partitions. What's the correct syntax in boot.config for GPT partitions?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
for gmirror to store
its metadata. Now that I'm using gpart I'm wondering if any of this trickery is
needed? Can I simply create my partitions with gpart then create mirrored
partitions using these partitions? I've tried this and it seems to work fine
but I'm just being cautious
the size of the c partition to
make sure there was space for gmirror to store its metadata. Now
that I'm using gpart I'm wondering if any of this trickery is
needed? Can I simply create my partitions with gpart then create
mirrored partitions using these partitions? I've tried this and it
seems
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 20:23 -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:27:54AM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2010-01-27 22:27, John Baldwin wrote:
GPT was defined along with EFI, so many folks assume that you have to use
EFI
to boot a GPT-labelled disk. However, FreeBSD has
On 2010-01-28 13:06, Robert Noland wrote:
John or Marcel can correct me, but I don't think that this is an issue.
The bootstrap is located in the pmbr in sector 0 and the GPT headers and
tables are in sectors 1 - 34. The bootstrap code knows how to read the
GPT tables and can deal with 2 tb
On Thursday 28 January 2010 7:26:24 am Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2010-01-28 13:06, Robert Noland wrote:
John or Marcel can correct me, but I don't think that this is an issue.
The bootstrap is located in the pmbr in sector 0 and the GPT headers and
tables are in sectors 1 - 34. The
Hey
I was under the impression that everyone and their dog is using GPT
partitioning in FreeBSD these days, including for boot drives and that
I was just being unlucky with my current NAS motherboard (Intel
D945GCLF2) having supposedly shaky support for GPT boot. But right now
I am having an
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 06:45:36PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
I was under the impression that everyone and their dog is using GPT
partitioning in FreeBSD these days, including for boot drives and that
I was just being unlucky with my current NAS motherboard (Intel
D945GCLF2) having supposedly
GPT booting is I believe only natively supported using an EFI BIOS.
However if you wish to use GPT booting with FreeBSD its not too hard,
you just cant install using sysinstall.
The Examples section of the gpart manpage is what i used to configure
the disk for my home server, a zotac ion atom
on 27/01/2010 18:45 Dan Naumov said the following:
Hey
I was under the impression that everyone and their dog is using GPT
partitioning in FreeBSD these days, including for boot drives and that
I was just being unlucky with my current NAS motherboard (Intel
D945GCLF2) having supposedly
to know anything about the partitions.
-- Brooks
pgpCLNbdHGH7i.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Dan Naumov dan.nau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey
I was under the impression that everyone and their dog is using GPT
partitioning in FreeBSD these days, including for boot drives and that
I was just being unlucky with my current NAS motherboard (Intel
D945GCLF2)
On Wednesday 27 January 2010 11:45:36 am Dan Naumov wrote:
Hey
I was under the impression that everyone and their dog is using GPT
partitioning in FreeBSD these days, including for boot drives and that
I was just being unlucky with my current NAS motherboard (Intel
D945GCLF2) having
On 2010-01-27 22:27, John Baldwin wrote:
GPT was defined along with EFI, so many folks assume that you have to use EFI
to boot a GPT-labelled disk. However, FreeBSD has its own BIOS-based
bootstrap that can handle GPT-labelled disks. I doubt the SuperMicro tech is
familiar with that case. I
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:27:54AM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2010-01-27 22:27, John Baldwin wrote:
GPT was defined along with EFI, so many folks assume that you have to use EFI
to boot a GPT-labelled disk. However, FreeBSD has its own BIOS-based
bootstrap that can handle GPT-labelled
to bootup because of critical errors on
the root partition.
We have /etc and /usr on the root partition and our home/var partitions
mistakenly do not have soft-updates flag set.
::dmesg::
http://the-irc.com/dmesg
::mount::
/dev/ad4s1a on / (ufs, local)
devfs on /dev (devfs, local, multilabel)
/dev
to the drive
but when the server was rebooted it failed to bootup because of critical
errors on the root partition.
We have /etc and /usr on the root partition and our home/var partitions
mistakenly do not have soft-updates flag set.
::dmesg::
http://the-irc.com/dmesg
::mount::
/dev
the server was rebooted it failed to bootup because of critical
errors on the root partition.
A healthy system does not get UFS errors during normal operation.
We have /etc and /usr on the root partition and our home/var partitions
mistakenly do not have soft-updates flag set.
::dmesg
Thanks everyone for their input it has helped greatly.
Does anyone know a way to toggle soft-updates on a UFS non-root partition
while the system is live or without having to recreate the partition?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:30:09AM -0500, The-IRC FreeBSD wrote:
Thanks everyone for their input it has helped greatly.
Does anyone know a way to toggle soft-updates on a UFS non-root partition
while the system is live or without having to recreate the partition?
Sure. Use the tunefs(8)
knows how large
the disk really is:
# fdisk da1
*** Working on device /dev/da1 ***
parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are:
cylinders=1458908 heads=255 sectors/track=63 (16065 blks/cyl)
Figures below won't work with BIOS for partitions not in cyl 1
parameters to be used for BIOS
On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 12:36:54 -0600, Peter Steele pste...@maxiscale.com wrote:
We have 3U systems with 3Ware raid controllers configured to give
us large 11TB logical drives. The diskinfo command shows this:
[...]
We want to create a BSD slice to cover the entire drive. My plan
was to use the
to create a BSD slice to cover the entire drive. My plan was to use
the fdisk -I option:
[snip]
You cannot use fdisk for this, because fdisk creates MBR partition
tables and these partitions are limited to 2 TB. You have three
options:
1. Use GPT instead of MBR. This is handled by gpt (FreeBSD 7
In the subject line, you wrote large partition, so I assume you won't want
to boot from from the device, but use it as a big storage area instead.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
For simplicity I didn't include all the details. In fact we need three slices,
one for the OS, one for swap, and the
You cannot use fdisk for this, because fdisk creates MBR partition tables and
these partitions are limited to 2 TB. You have three
options:
1. Use GPT instead of MBR. This is handled by gpt (FreeBSD 7) and gpart
(FreeBSD 8) commands.
We're running 8.0. I'll have to check out gpart.
2. Use
system. It is comparable (but not the same as) what Windows
calls a logical volume inside a DOS extended partition.
To re-express your requirements:
You need one slice covering the whole disk. This slice
should contain three partitions: One for the OS, one for
swap, and one for data. What you
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote:
b) go with gpt / gpart, which is okay if FreeBSD will
be the only OS that accesses the disk(s) in question,
as I may assume by your statements.
GUID partitions are recognized by many more OS's than just FreeBSD although
as
well. I guess it can be confusing if one isn't careful with context.
I'm not sure if I understood you correctly. You won't need to create three
slices, just one slice, containin three partitions.
We already have a configuration in place on our smaller 1U boxes which are
divided into three
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Peter Steele pste...@maxiscale.com wrote:
You cannot use fdisk for this, because fdisk creates MBR partition tables and
these partitions are limited to 2 TB. You have three
options:
1. Use GPT instead of MBR. This is handled by gpt (FreeBSD 7) and gpart
(FreeBSD
b) go with gpt / gpart, which is okay if FreeBSD will
be the only OS that accesses the disk(s) in question,
as I may assume by your statements.
That's correct; these will be strictly BSD accessible drives.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
.
You're right - fdisk uses different terminology.
We already have a configuration in place on our smaller 1U
boxes which are divided into three slices, one for the OS
(with 2 partitions), one for swap, and the third slice for
data. The third slice is divided into two partitions, one
UFS
be
confusing if one isn't careful with context.
You're right - fdisk uses different terminology.
We already have a configuration in place on our smaller 1U
boxes which are divided into three slices, one for the OS
(with 2 partitions), one for swap, and the third slice for
data. The third
dedicated mode isn't possible
from sysinstall anymore, but still possible via the command
line tools. I don't see a reason why it is considered to be
something bad, but the inclusion of a carrier slice for
the OS's partitions has always been recommended. But for
data disks where only one partition
in their own GUID partitions. Haven't
had 11TB to try, however. ;-)
--
Walter M. Pawley w...@wump.org
Wump Research Company
676 River Bend Road, Roseburg, OR 97471
541-672-8975
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
Gjournaled USB drive partitions wiped upon reboot. After
repartitioning, again the partitions erased on reboot. For now,
repartitioned to reclaim data and disabled gjournal. Anybody have the
same problem and how to resolve?
___
freebsd-questions
When mounting two partitions from a USB dirve, it can cause the drive access
lock up for a long time.
Details:
Terminal 1 --
term1# mount /dev/da0s3d /mnt
term1# cd /mnt ; rm -fr *
when rm starts, go to terminal 2 and do:
term2# mount /dev/da0s3e /dist ### this will hanging for a long time
...@freebsd.org; freebsd-...@freebsd.org
Subject: 8.0-RC3 USB lock up on mounting two partitions from one USB drive
When mounting two partitions from a USB dirve, it can cause the drive
access lock up for a long time. Details:
Terminal 1 --
term1# mount /dev/da0s3d /mnt
term1# cd /mnt ; rm -fr
It looks like a system issue since it also happens to the SATA drive.
The USB drive seems having more difficulty. I will back up rest
partitions,
Then redo the slice and partition to see if problem goes away.
If so, then 8.0-R has a backward compatibility issue on the partition
table or format
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 02:52:57AM -0700, Peter wrote:
iH,
Pulled an old disk lying around...
and started mounting partitions in it.
The weird thing is that the first slice [~15GB] is said to be fat, but I
do have freebsd partitions on it:
denver:#mount|grep ad10
/dev/ad10s1a
: 8.0-RC3 USB lock up on mounting two partitions from one USB drive
When mounting two partitions from a USB dirve, it can cause the drive access
lock up for a long time.
Details:
Terminal 1 --
term1# mount /dev/da0s3d /mnt
term1# cd /mnt ; rm -fr *
when rm starts, go to terminal 2 and do:
term2
iH,
Pulled an old disk lying around...
and started mounting partitions in it.
The weird thing is that the first slice [~15GB] is said to be fat, but I
do have freebsd partitions on it:
denver:#mount|grep ad10
/dev/ad10s1a on /maxtor500GB (ufs, NFS exported, local, soft-updates)
/dev/ad10s1d
Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk writes:
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 05:35:58PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
[snip]
Not so sure I did anything for your most important question - if ext2 s ext3
is a problem, but I hope the rest is helpful.
No, it's not a problem Jerry. ext3 is basically
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 10:18:21PM -0800, Carl Johnson typed:
Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk writes:
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 05:35:58PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
[snip]
Not so sure I did anything for your most important question - if ext2 s
ext3
is a problem, but I hope the
with a journal, so it can be
mounted as ext2 if needed).
I've seen ext3 partitions that are not mountable by our ext2fs driver. So
your mileage may vary a lot here, depending on the exact on-disk format of
your partition. You should probably keep this in mind when you prepare
your backup mediums too
Ruben de Groot mai...@bzerk.org writes:
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 10:18:21PM -0800, Carl Johnson typed:
Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk writes:
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 05:35:58PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
[snip]
Not so sure I did anything for your most important question - if
Hi all,
I am considering switching from Debian Linux to FreeBSD. I am
wondering if at install time, sysinstall is able to allow me to keep
/home from my Debian installation. /home on Debian is currently a
separate partition in its own right, mounted as RXT3. I only have the
one hard disk in my
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 09:34:48PM +, David Chanters wrote:
Hi all,
I am considering switching from Debian Linux to FreeBSD. I am
wondering if at install time, sysinstall is able to allow me to keep
/home from my Debian installation. /home on Debian is currently a
separate partition
partitions will be shown when you get to fdisk, IIRC.
Don't touch them and just create further slices for your FreeBSD
installation.
I assume you've got space on your disk to create further slices. If
not and your Debian installation takes up your whole disk, you'll have
to create space within Debian
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 05:35:58PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
[snip]
Not so sure I did anything for your most important question - if ext2 s ext3
is a problem, but I hope the rest is helpful.
No, it's not a problem Jerry. ext3 is basically ext2 + journal, so you
can mount it at as ext2
Hi,
No, you were not dreaming. When in doubt, check the source. From
head/sbin/bsdlabel/bsdlabel.c [1]:
Allow bsdlabel to operate on labels that have at most 26 partitions by virtue
of there not being any (lower-case) letters avaliable for more partitions.
[1] http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc
chunk of
disk was named. That is, cursor to '{controller}d1s2g', say, and be able
to 'change' the final character to any of the partitions (abdefh) that are
not currently allocated any space.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
guessing not, since Chapter 8 in Absolute FreeBSD says that a
partition is part of a slice,
You can join 2 partitions into 1 with gconcat. OTOH that would wipe any
existing data as you would need to put a new filesystem on the combined
partition.
No, you can always use growfs to expand
and the new drive? I'm
guessing not, since Chapter 8 in Absolute FreeBSD says that a
partition is part of a slice,
You can join 2 partitions into 1 with gconcat. OTOH that would wipe any
existing data as you would need to put a new filesystem on the combined
partition.
No, you can always use growfs
Now that I've got my rsnapshot backup server working beautifully,
backing up several servers to a central backup server (I like this a
lot), I have a problem...
I built my backup server from a machine I had lying around. It has
two 140G hard drives. I dedicated one drive to a /backup
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Almberg wrote:
Now that I've got my rsnapshot backup server working beautifully,
backing up several servers to a central backup server (I like this a
lot), I have a problem...
I built my backup server from a machine I had lying around. It
is part of a slice,
You can join 2 partitions into 1 with gconcat. OTOH that would wipe any
existing data as you would need to put a new filesystem on the combined
partition.
No, you can always use growfs to expand the filesystem.
But of course, the usual warnings apply, read carefully the
growfs
of a slice,
You can join 2 partitions into 1 with gconcat. OTOH that would wipe any
existing data as you would need to put a new filesystem on the combined
partition.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:45:47AM -0400, John Almberg wrote:
Question: is it possible to just expand my existing /backup partition
to encompass both the current drive and the new drive? I'm guessing
not, since Chapter 8 in Absolute FreeBSD says that a partition is
part of a slice, which
Many people's only familiarity with computers in general will be from a
Windows centric perspective. Somehow there is a tendency to believe that
inserting a CD, booting, and then proceeding to click OK in a dialog box a
few dozen times makes them some kind of expert when they successfully
On Thursday 06 August 2009 09:43:47 Mark Stapper wrote:
In light of this, I would really enjoy seeing a Ubuntu like movement
in the FreeBSD corner.
What I mean is that it would be nice for my mother to install and use
FreeBSD.
[snip]
To achieve this, there are two things that should be made
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Jonathan McKeownj.mcke...@ru.ac.za wrote:
On Thursday 06 August 2009 09:43:47 Mark Stapper wrote:
In light of this, I would really enjoy seeing a Ubuntu like movement
in the FreeBSD corner.
What I mean is that it would be nice for my mother to install and use
In light of this, I would really enjoy seeing a Ubuntu like movement
in the FreeBSD corner.
What I mean is that it would be nice for my mother to install and use
FreeBSD.
I am not saying that a Windows user should be able to feel right at home
on a box running FreeBSD, but a computer user
- Original Message -
From: Neal Hogan nealho...@gmail.com
To: Jonathan McKeown j.mcke...@ru.ac.za
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: FreeBSD for the common man(or woman) (was: upgrade
7.2overwrites partitions)
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009
[snip]
In light of this, I would really enjoy seeing a Ubuntu like movement
in the FreeBSD corner.
What I mean is that it would be nice for my mother to install and use
FreeBSD.
I am not saying that a Windows user should be able to feel right at home
on a box running FreeBSD, but a computer
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 09:56:59 +0200, Jonathan McKeown j.mcke...@ru.ac.za wrote:
PC-BSD is FreeBSD, pre-packaged with a usable desktop and its own simplified
package manager.
If you're talking about PBI, that's what the average user expects:
You open a web browser (d'oh), search for what you
Polytropon wrote:
On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:58:58 -0400, PJ af.gour...@videotron.ca wrote:
Could somone explain to me why an upgrade from sysinstall would
overwrite partitions; especially when the instructions indicate that
files will not be overwritten?
I'm not sure how to explain
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 15:49:38 PJ wrote:
Polytropon wrote:
On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:58:58 -0400, PJ af.gour...@videotron.ca wrote:
Could somone explain to me why an upgrade from sysinstall would
overwrite partitions; especially when the instructions indicate that
files
Jonathan,
I'd like to thank you for your polite words. I'm not sure I could
have been able to express in the same way. Allow me a few comments:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 16:51:53 +0200, Jonathan McKeown j.mcke...@ru.ac.za wrote:
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 15:49:38 PJ wrote:
Well, whatever it was it
Polytropon wrote:
[snip]
Personally, I do think it's a pity, because FreeBSD (in my experience,
since FreeBSD 4.5) is stable, easy to use (once you have the basic Unix
concepts on board), and astonishingly well-documented. It's also
supported by one of the friendliest and most knowledgeable
PJ wrote:
Could somone explain to me why an upgrade from sysinstall would
overwrite partitions; especially when the instructions indicate that
files will not be overwritten?
Dear Phil,
Ofcourse if you upgrade, files will be overwritten. Could you please be
more specific?
Greetz,
Mark
Could somone explain to me why an upgrade from sysinstall would
overwrite partitions; especially when the instructions indicate that
files will not be overwritten?
--
Hervé Kempf: Pour sauver la planète, sortez du capitalisme.
-
Phil
On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:58:58 -0400, PJ af.gour...@videotron.ca wrote:
Could somone explain to me why an upgrade from sysinstall would
overwrite partitions; especially when the instructions indicate that
files will not be overwritten?
I'm not sure how to explain. It's possible that sysinstall
slices (type 18) and no FreeBSD slice.
Remember, I had successfully installed 6.4 on this drive and was able to boot
into both the service partition and FreeBSD.
I ended up deleting all the partitions and recreating them by hand. I first
created the service partition slice with a size of 80262
Hi,
I have noticed that some programs have trouble interacting with my
ms-dos partition. For example, I attempted to download a torrent with
ctorrent. Works perfectly if I am saving to the bsd partition but my
whole system freezes if I use the ms-dos partition.
I mount it in /etc/fstab as
ms-dos partition. For example, I attempted to download a torrent with
ctorrent. Works perfectly if I am saving to the bsd partition but my
whole system freezes if I use the ms-dos partition.
I mount it in /etc/fstab as /dev/ad0s2 /d msdosfs rw 0 0
Is this behaviour the result of the 0 0?
no.
so write a short article about how you did this and why using hardware
RAID solutions is bad, and put it on your website.
it's AT LEAST funny that your hardware raid instead of protecting -
rendered your data inaccessible.
___
If anyone's interested, the last post I made about doing a bsdlabel, fsck,
mdconfig etc on the damaged disk image worked. I have recovered all my
files! Hooray!!!
Skye
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Recovering-partitions-from-disk-image--tp22862006p22889910.html
Sent
Hello FreeBSD gurus,
I recently had the pleasure of trying to recover a failed RAID1 array. It
consisted of two 120GB disks in mirrored configuration. Both drives have a
ton of bad sectors, so bad that the 3ware RAID card stopped recognizing that
there was a mirror at all. Having no other
So, what can I do with those numbers? It doesn't look like there's any
valid MBR or disklabel on this disk image. Can I extract these filesystems
one at a time from the image and mount them somehow?
Thanks,
Skye
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Recovering-partitions-from
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, snott wrote:
Update: I figured out how to get scan_ffs to read a file by looking at the
program source (if it starts with / then it considers it a regular file to
read instead of a device) and got the following results which matches well
with the TestDisk output.
$ scan_ffs
-a -t vnode -f disk.img -u 0
If that looks like it might work, should I fsck the disk image before or
after mounting with mdconfig or not at all? Do I risk kernel panic without
fsck?
Thanks,
Skye
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Recovering-partitions-from-disk-image
on
/dev/twed0s1a 4.9G 2.8G 1.7G62%/
/dev/twed0s1e 9.8G 5.0G 4.0G56%/var
/dev/twed0s1f 9.8G 952M 8.1G10%/usr/home
/dev/twed0s2e88G15G65G19%/mnt
TestDisk can find all the old partitions, but I can't figure out what if
anything it can
2X 250GB SATA drives that I've established a gmirror(8) over, following the
instructions in section 19.4 of the Handbook.
Now, one of the machines, being transformed into a webserver, needs a
separate, newly created /var/www partition (its current partitions only take
up 27G of the total
of the machines, being transformed into a webserver, needs a
separate, newly created /var/www partition (its current partitions
only take up 27G of the total ~238G available).
My dilemma is -- how do I add another partition without hosing the
system? It seems to me that there is no other way
bsdlabel /dev/mirror/gm0s1
# /dev/mirror/gm0s1:
8 partitions:
#size offsetfstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg]
a: 104857604.2BSD 2048 16384 8
b: 8320016 1048576 swap
c: 4883759370unused0 0 # raw
part, don't edit
d: 2097152
or, if it is what
they call 'dangerously dedicated' do: bsdlabel gm0
$ sudo bsdlabel /dev/mirror/gm0s1
# /dev/mirror/gm0s1:
8 partitions:
#size offsetfstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg]
a: 104857604.2BSD 2048 16384 8
b: 8320016 1048576 swap
c
created /var/www partition (its current partitions
only take up 27G of the total ~238G available).
My dilemma is -- how do I add another partition without hosing the
system? It seems to me that there is no other way than to destroy the
gmirror, create the new partition, then re-create
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
--On Tuesday, December 09, 2008 10:15:45 +0100 Ivan Voras [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I have FreeBSD 7 running in a QEMU VM ... works like a charm, but I'm
wondering if there is some way of *increasing* the size of the image beyond
what I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Tuesday, December 09, 2008 10:15:45 +0100 Ivan Voras [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I have FreeBSD 7 running in a QEMU VM ... works like a charm, but I'm
wondering if there is some way of *increasing* the size of the
/A mirror/umgah0.journale
Does the above suggest that you've ended up with individual journal
providers for each partition anyway? If so, where are they and have you
really achieved anything functionally different? Are they at the end of
their individually associated partitions or all together
really achieved anything functionally different? Are they at the end of
their individually associated partitions or all together somewhere else? Has
the ill-advised journaled small partition issue been successfully overcome
through what you've done?
First, there is only one journal - for /dev
3868799910: mirror/gmd contains journal.
GEOM_JOURNAL: Journal mirror/gmd consistent.
Just one thing - you have two separate journaled partitions, one
journal per one partition.
Yes, this is the test setup I made with one journal for / and one journal
for /usr. Only an unclean journal on / rendered
101 - 200 of 522 matches
Mail list logo
