On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:04:26AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
> Seriously dude, this looks like a dumb scheme that gives you warm
> and fuzzies but doesn't actually accomplish anything except increased
> complexity.
I came up with this way back when I was using another distro that
didn't do "ro
On Saturday 20 November 2010 20:46:48 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 18:59 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Mick
> did
>
> opine thusly:
> > On Saturday 20 November 2010 00:22:49 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > Apparently, though unproven, at 01:21 on Saturday 20 November 2010,
> >
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:59 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Mick did
opine thusly:
> On Saturday 20 November 2010 00:22:49 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 01:21 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Neil
> >
> > Bothwick did opine thusly:
> > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:13:
On Saturday 20 November 2010 13:26:03 David W Noon wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 00:10:02 +0100, Mick wrote about Re: [gentoo-user]
> >Short of measuring the latency with some system (which I wouldn't know
> >how) I have experimented with setting the /boot partition on primary
> >and logical partit
On 11/20/10, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> Really? Please don't tell this computer, it's been booting from a logical
> partition for more than six years.
GRUB user, meet a LILO user? :)
--
Arttu V.
On Saturday 20 November 2010 00:22:49 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 01:21 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Neil
>
> Bothwick did opine thusly:
> > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:13:50 +, Mick wrote:
> > > Short of measuring the latency with some system (which I wouldn't know
> >
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:26:03 +, David W Noon wrote:
> Unless you have the mother of all initrd's or initramfs's, you cannot
> have /boot on a logical partition -- only a primary partition, as BIOS
> interrupts will only access raw drives and primary partitions.
% fdisk -l /dev/sda
Disk /dev/
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 00:10:02 +0100, Mick wrote about Re: [gentoo-user]
migrating disks (from mounts to disklabels:
>On Friday 19 November 2010 19:19:34 David W Noon wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:00:04 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote about Re:
>>
>> [gentoo-user] migrating
On Friday 19 November 2010 22:13:50 Mick wrote:
> Short of measuring the latency with some system (which I wouldn't
> know how) I have experimented with setting the /boot partition on
> primary and logical partitions and the difference (on a stopwatch)
> was measurable in seconds betweeen having s
Apparently, though unproven, at 01:21 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Neil
Bothwick did opine thusly:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:13:50 +, Mick wrote:
> > Short of measuring the latency with some system (which I wouldn't know
> > how) I have experimented with setting the /boot partition on primary
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:13:50 +, Mick wrote:
> Short of measuring the latency with some system (which I wouldn't know
> how) I have experimented with setting the /boot partition on primary
> and logical partitions and the difference (on a stopwatch) was
> measurable in seconds betweeen having s
Apparently, though unproven, at 01:03 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Neil
Bothwick did opine thusly:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:04:03 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > XFS allows growing a mounted filesystem, but it has no option to
> > > shrink a filesystem, mounted or otherwise.
> >
> > xfs isn't
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:04:03 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > XFS allows growing a mounted filesystem, but it has no option to
> > shrink a filesystem, mounted or otherwise.
> xfs isn't something I use and I had a niggling thought I might have got
> the details wrong. Thanks for that.
It's quit
Apparently, though unproven, at 00:13 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Mick did
opine thusly:
> On Friday 19 November 2010 19:19:34 David W Noon wrote:
> > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:00:04 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote about Re:
> >
> > [gentoo-user] migrating disks (from mounts t
On Friday 19 November 2010 19:19:34 David W Noon wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:00:04 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote about Re:
>
> [gentoo-user] migrating disks (from mounts to disklabels:
> >On Friday 19 November 2010 14:42:23 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >> On Fri, 19 Nov 2
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:00:04 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] migrating disks (from mounts to disklabels:
>On Friday 19 November 2010 14:42:23 Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:52:50 +, Mick wrote:
>> > Also primary partitions which he does no
On Friday 19 November 2010 14:42:23 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:52:50 +, Mick wrote:
> > Also primary partitions which he does not seem to be using at all
> > have a slight edge over logical.
>
> Do you have any data on this? I generally use all logical partitions
> but could
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:41 on Friday 19 November 2010, Neil
Bothwick did opine thusly:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:07:54 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Yes, you can grow a mounted filesystem, just not shrink it. Most decent
> > Unix filesystems support this, I think xfs is the only one i
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:52:50 +, Mick wrote:
> Also primary partitions which he does not seem to be using at all have
> a slight edge over logical.
Do you have any data on this? I generally use all logical partitions but
could be persuaded to rethink.
--
Neil Bothwick
Top Oxymorons Number
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:07:54 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Yes, you can grow a mounted filesystem, just not shrink it. Most decent
> Unix filesystems support this, I think xfs is the only one in common
> use that doesn't.
XFS allows growing a mounted filesystem, but it has no option to shrink a
f
Apparently, though unproven, at 12:49 on Friday 19 November 2010, Marius
Vaitiekunas did opine thusly:
> Hi,
> One question about ext4. Is it possible to resize partition without
> unmounting it like on reiserfs filesystem?
Yes, you can grow a mounted filesystem, just not shrink it. Most decent
On Friday 19 November 2010 09:04:26 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 03:44 on Friday 19 November 2010, Walter
> Dnes
>
> did opine thusly:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:20:52PM -0600, Dale wrote
> >
> > > This is mine and it worked when I rebooted a bit ago.
> > >
> > > LA
Hi,
One question about ext4. Is it possible to resize partition without
unmounting it like on reiserfs filesystem?
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 03:44 on Friday 19 November 2010, Walter
> Dnes
> did opine thusly:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 201
Apparently, though unproven, at 03:44 on Friday 19 November 2010, Walter Dnes
did opine thusly:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:20:52PM -0600, Dale wrote
>
> > This is mine and it worked when I rebooted a bit ago.
> >
> > LABEL=boot/bootext2noatime1 2
> > LABEL=root
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:20:52PM -0600, Dale wrote
> This is mine and it worked when I rebooted a bit ago.
>
> LABEL=boot/bootext2noatime1 2
> LABEL=root /reiserfsdefaults0 1
> LABEL=swapnoneswapsw0 0
> LABE
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 22:24:23 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 23:59 on Wednesday 17 November 2010, James
> did opine thusly:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a ~250 gig sata disk I want to migrate to a 2T
> > Sata disk. This is simple, but, I have a few caveats.
[snip ...]
> tar c /path/to/old/ | tar xvp /path/to/new
Whoops... That should be
tar c -C /path/to/old/ . | tar xvp -C /path/to/new/
Sorry,
andrea
> Disk /dev/sdb: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes
> 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
> Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
A small caveat -- if this is an "advanced format" drive be sure to use
fdisk in sector mode (fd
James wrote:
so what does new fstab using disk labels look like?
<< SNIP>>
Discussion, corrections or caveats are most welcome.
This is mine and it worked when I rebooted a bit ago.
LABEL=boot/bootext2noatime1 2
LABEL=root /reiserfs
Am 17.11.2010 22:59, schrieb James:
> Hello,
>
> I have a ~250 gig sata disk I want to migrate to a 2T
> Sata disk. This is simple, but, I have a few caveats.
>
[...]
>
>Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/sda1 * 16405514481317 HPFS
Apparently, though unproven, at 23:59 on Wednesday 17 November 2010, James did
opine thusly:
> Hello,
>
> I have a ~250 gig sata disk I want to migrate to a 2T
> Sata disk. This is simple, but, I have a few caveats.
>
> old disk:
>
> Disk /dev/sda: 320.1 GB, 320072933376 bytes
> 255 heads, 63
Hello,
I have a ~250 gig sata disk I want to migrate to a 2T
Sata disk. This is simple, but, I have a few caveats.
old disk:
Disk /dev/sda: 320.1 GB, 320072933376 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 5
32 matches
Mail list logo
