In the boot process of Linux we have the initrd that is a root file system and is mounted before the real root file system become ready to mount. What is the procedure of mounting? What should happen so we can say that file system is mounted? And another little question why we say ¨root¨ file system instead of just file system?
View 2 RepliesI need to customize linux kernel root file system for embedded linux system. During compile time, for root file system I am able to create different user/group ex: "gnumuzic/Muzic". But I want to give access to group "Muzic" to some folders like /dev/nexig during compile time.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have Debian Squeeze installed. I have 3 different HDDs, one of them is SATA, the other 2 are IDE, on one of which I have the distro installed.
How do I mount the other 2 partitions? I see them in "Places" but when I click on them I get an error message "Unable to Mount <The name of the volume> Can not get volume.fstype.alternative".
I can see both volumes in /dev/ntfs. I tried doing
Code:
I have a dual boot Xp and Ubuntu 10.10.
Recently I was downloading some upgrades in Ubuntu and unfortunately the power to the system got off.
Thereafter on booting it comes to the Grub menu and I'm able to select the OS from the list but if I choose Ubuntu it comes up with a message "General error mounting file system" and the terminal is activated. However, if XP is selected it boots with no issues.
/dev/sda6 is ubuntu installation
/dev/sda7 is swap partition
I went through lot of threads over the net and tried fsck, e2fsck and other variations of that command but at the end all I get the message as
it says sda6 is clean but for sda7 it says :
Superblock invalid trying backup blocks.... Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/sda7 at the end it suggests "u might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock: e2fsck -b 8193 <device>"
refering some threads here I tried my luck with live CD and the command : sudo e2fsck -C0 -p -f -v /dev/sda7
I made a modification to the /etc/fstab using Ubuntu 10.04 and now it wont boot correctly. I can get the cli but when I enter /etc/fstab and make an edit it says" changing permission of /etc/fstab: read only file system" This is what I get when the system boots:
PHP Code:
[code]....
so if I choose manual I get to the cli and whenever I attempt to edit the file I get the above error. I used another machine and attempted to mount the drive but I get the same error I added notaime option to my fstab by accident so if I choose manual I get to the cli and whenever I attempt to edit the file I get the above error. I used another machine and attempted to mount the drive but I get the same error. I tried
PHP Code:
[code]...
and I get
PHP Code:
[code]....
How can I mount the partition so that I can edit it?
I have an image of an ext3 file system done with dd. I know that the file system is corrupted but I want to try to recover some files. Whatever I dd it again to the original partition or assign the dd image to a loop device, that's what happens:
- dumpe2fs -h gives me a valid ext3 superblock.
- as I try to mount the device read only, it fails with a bad magic number error.
- executing dumpe2fs -h again gives bad magic number error.
- trying debugfs or fsck with backup superblocks fails the same way.
For me it seems that in spite of mounting the device as read-only, mount command do something wrong with the superblock as before the mount the superblock is correct and it's there.
How well is the ext4 new file system mounting compatibility with the older ext3 previous Linux installations ? I refer to Ubuntu 9.04 and the new Fedora 11 which have the option to install with the ext4 file format. Will it be better if I install with the older ext3, so that I will be able to mount all other Linux from each other in a multi-boot system ?
View 6 Replies View RelatedI work for a company that makes portable devices running Linux and I was recently asked to make the underlying file system read-only for "security" purposes. Since the distribution is based on LinuxFromScratch, I know that very little writing happens at run time. So, even if the device runs on a usb flash device, I doubt that putting the root file system RO will be that beneficial. I am actually more concerned about a process actually breaking because it cannot open a file in RW mode than a process going rogue and filling the root file system with log files, etc. I'd really like to ear what kind of advantages disadvantages there really is with read-only file-systems.
View 6 Replies View RelatedI saw an article use the following cat command to create a new text file:$ cat > first.sh << ENDAnd then after press the 'return' buttion, a '>' sign appeared expecting you to input the content. If I type 'END' then the 'return' button, then a new text file is created with what I just typed...I'd like to know what's the differnece in just type:$ cat > first.shwithout the '<<' sign?What '<<' really means? I cannot find it's meaning anywere... seems it's not in the redirection section.
View 6 Replies View RelatedAn old machine in our office, running Ubuntu 6.06 all of a sudden will not boot up. I get the following info during boot:
Uncompressing Linux... Ok Booting the kernel
mount: Mounting /root/sda1 /root failed: No such device
mount: Mounting /root/dev on /dev/.static/dev failed: No such file or directory
[code]....
I haven't changed anything on the system as far as I'm aware, and I ran some HD diagnostics and everything seems fine. however when I try to mount the drive with the following command:
sudo mount -t ext3 -o rw /dev/hda1 /mnt
I get the following error:
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad
superblock on /dev/sda1, missing code
page or helper program, or other error
In some cases useful info is found in
syslog - try dmesg | tail or so
I ran fdisk -l and it says the partition type is Linux. The output after running dmesg | tail :
[12207.483801] init_special_inode: bogus i_mode (101)
[12207.483809] EXT2-fs: corrupt root inode, run e2fsck
[12260.427078] init_special_inode: bogus i_mode (101)
[code]...
Update: After running e2fsck -p /dev/sda1, I get the following info:
/dev/sda1: clean, 142449 / 9584640 files, 5402711 / 19161520 blocks
I am getting an error while booting my linux system: Can't mount root file system.Boot has failed, sleeping forever.OS is Red hat enterprise linux 6, With Intel P4, 1 GB Ram, 120 GB IDE hdd seagate. it was working fine from last 4 days. from today morning this is giving error. only mysql & apache is installed in it.
please suggest is there any way to repair the root & boot volumes. waiting for valuable reply.
Is it possible to encrypt the Entire root file system using LUKS.I am currently using Ubuntu 10.4 LUCID.After several hours of Google ,most of the articles were focusing to "Encrypting a drive/removable media ".. My aim is to encrypt whole File system which is currently using.
My Concerns, How to Encrypt a running file system? Will it lead to data loss?
im trying to prepare my partitions for fresh installation. The partition manager didnt list anything with an error message that said:Quote:No root file system is defined. Please correct this from the partitioning menu?This is what Gparted displays Quote:
/dev/sda1 ext3 /tmp/boot
/dev/sda2 unknown
/dev/sda3 ext3 /tmp/opsys
I just installed Wine (1.1.3* dev release) and installed Notepad++ (OSS) and Net Meter (Freeware, the latest beta is actually OSS too). I also intend to install a few other things later. The only failure so far is the latest WinSCP So it made me wonder about what running a process/software as "root" actually means. When I use U.S.C or 'apt-get install' to install software on my computer, and type my password, it displays that keyring icon on my systray.
Does this mean I am root at that moment? And how about running wine, the wine processes, and any windows *.exe I'm installing and running? I basically am afraid that I am running all the wine-related stuff as root, even though there is no indication that I at least have elevated privileges. What is/are the worst-case scenario(s) about wine?
I have recently experienced a problem that occurred after an automatic update. After the update it said restart system. So I did and proceeded as normal. when after the reboot Firefox suddenly stopped working, crashed and upon clicking it again only a blank box appeared. Then my other apps followed and i soon couldn't do anything so i shut down my computer. Upon restart I got a black screen with tons of text and something around the lines of
mount: mounting /dev on /root/dev failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting / sys/ on root/sys failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting /proc on /root/proc failed: No such file or dirctory
[code]....
So I rebooted and pressed shift to open that grub thing and booted from an earlier kernel. This time it said checking HD for errors and after booted normally. Everything seemed fine but next day it did it again. Starting with Firefox crashing and then everything else. I again booted from a previous kernel and it worked but upon checking with uname -a it did not list the kernel i chose to boot from. So I decided to upgrade 10.04 to 10.10. This upgraded my kernel and deleted the old ones so i am hoping i am good now.
Information on the net seems very sparse or outdated for how to go about booting to a RAM disk. I need to be be able to boot a PC without a hard drive in it. I want to be able to PXE boot a PC and supply it with a RAM disk image that also contains the contents of the root file system (obviously stripped down enough to keep the file size small and the boot up time fast).What I have gathered so far is that I need to extract the contents of the initrd.img file, add files as necessary, and repackage the initrd.img file. What I get confused on is how to configure the kernel line parameters to tell it to boot to RAM and not the hard drive and how to go about modifying the init script in the initrd.img to not switch to the hard drive for the root file system. I can't find anything on the net that describes concrete steps on how to go about accomplishing all of this. I'm aware of the existence of Live CD's, but I need to be able to boot the PC without relying on a hard drive, CD, or any other external media. It needs to get all of its contents from the PXE boot server and boot to RAM only. I have the PXE boot side configured successfully. Also, putting the root file system on a NFS share is also out of the question.
View 8 Replies View RelatedI've been using *Unix systems for many years now, and I've always been led to believe that its best to partition certain dirs into separate FileSystems, off the main root FS.
For instance, /tmp /var /usr etc
Leaving as little as possible on the main / system.
Its so that you don't fill up the root system be accident, by some user putting in too bigger files in /tmp, for example.
I would presume that filling the / system would not be too good for Linux, as it would not be able to write logs and possibly other things that it needs to.
I believe that if root gets full, then there is something like a 5% amount saved for just 'root' to write to, so that it can do its stuff.
However, eventually, / will become full, and writes will fail.
On top of this, certain scripting tools, such as awk, use the /tmp/ system to store temp files in, and awk wont be able to write to /tmp/ as its full, so awk will fail.
However, I'm being advised that there is no need to put /tmp /var etc onto separate FSs, as there is no problem nowerdays with / filling up. So, /tmp /var /usr are all on the root FS.
I'm talking about large systems, with TBs of data (which is on a separate FS), and with a user populations of around 800-1000 users, and 24/7 system access.
I have a Rad Hat 7.0 old Linux system that crashed due to power failure. On reboot the system goes to Checking Root File System and does 92.5% check and fails.
Here are the error messages I get.
I don't know what to do at this point so I say yes and it goes in some wierd mode.
SO I ran fsck manually but I get an error PARALLEIZING FSCK.
I can't fix the corrupted stuff for the system to reboot. THIS IS VITAL.
After upgrading from 10.04 to 10.10 I have had some problems booting my Ubuntu. It all started when restarting after the upgrade, and I got the error;
Code:
mount: mounting /dev on /root/dev failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting / sys/ on root/sys failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting /proc on /root/proc failed: No such file or dirctory
Target filesystem doesn't have /sbin/init.
No init found. Try passing init= boot arg
BusyBox v1.13.3 (Ubuntu 1:1.13.3.1ubuntu11) built-in shell (ash)(initramfs) After searching the Internet, I found a "solution". I just had to boot with a USB stick with the Ubuntu Rescue Remix (the normal Ubuntu USB won't boot either), and i wrote;
Code:
sudo fsck /dev/sdb5
Now I could start my Ubuntu again. So whats the problem? If I turn off my computer the normal way, there is no problem, but if I log off, put it into sleep mode, if something happens and I have to turn it off with the button it goes back to the first problem, and I have to reboot it with the USB stick and fix it all over again! If I don't have the USB stick with me, I probably wont be able to use my laptop!
since running update manager on my daughters net running 10.04 netbook on boot up I get the following on the screen
mount: mounting /dev on /root/dev failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting /sys on /root/sys failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting /proc on /root/proc failed: No such file or directory
Target filesystem doesn�t have /sbin/init.
[code]....
Doesn't seem to matter which version, every time I try to install Software raid on an Ubuntu server system, it blows up with this error. Seems I've had trouble for several versions.
Code:
mount: mounting /dev/disk/by-uuid/f35415ee-4c14-4eb1-995f-f19fbcd760c7 on /root
failed: Invalid argument
mount: mounting /dev on /root/dev failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting /sys on /root/sys failed: No such file or directory
[code]...
I've done it on Centos Fine, and followed the many different instructions I've seen for Ubuntu. The only luck I've had was with bios raid, but I would much rather let Mdadm handle things.
My build:
ubuntu-10.04.2-server-amd64 CD install
AMD 1055T 6Core
4GB ram
Asus M4A88TD-MUSB3
[code]...
I install both as letting Ubuntu decide partitions for one drive, do the same for the other, and create a raid, and do them from scratch. No dice, same problem. I've tried that one as logical and as primary too. No difference. Something just doesn't like booting from a raid 1 Mirror. I've tried installing grub on both HDDs (sda1 + sdb1)I've tried several CDs, burned from several machines. Re-downloaded from Torrent and from the website. The DVD drives work since I purchased new DVD drives for both one workstation and the server. Things install fine under CentOS, software raid comes up.
standard Linux installation utilities split the root file-system and the home file-system on two separate but relatively equal-sized partitions? For example, when I put fedora on an 80GB disk, it automatically gave the root file-system 32GB and home 30GB and the swap 8GB of space. However, since my home file-system has a directory with 28GB of files in it, why is my root file-system reading 100% usage? Is the home FS overlaid on top of the root FS? Is there an advantage to doing this? I just made a boot partition (50mb or so), a root partition (90% of the disk space) and a swap (4%-5% disk space).
View 5 Replies View RelatedI am using Gentoo Linux and for a while now, the root file system is mounted read-only on booting. For obvious reasons, this is quite annoying as most services do not start up correctly (I do not use a separate file system for /var). After the system is up, I have to log in, remount the root file system read-write, fix /etc/mtab, mount all other file systems in from /etc/fstab and then start up all the missing daemons. I know that there are ways to make a system run properly with a read-only file system, but I would rather restore the old behaviour of a writable root file system.
The strange thing is that after running mount / -o remount,rw, the file system is mounted in writable mode without any errors. I suspected some problem with fsck, but now I have disabled automatic file system checks on the partition (tune2fs -c0 -i0).When I run dmesg, only these lines mention the partition at all, although I am not sure if not something gets lost because /var/log is not writable:
EXT3-fs (sda5): mounted filesystem with writeback data mode</code>
EXT3-fs (sda5): using internal journal
The line in /etc/fstab looks like this:
[code]....
I have a fedora 14 system. I booted a suse installation that existed on an external harddisk and wanted to access my original fedora user home directory using non-root preveliges(so that i can use the gui file manager), so I searched on the internet and made a command to (chown -R mysuseUser:Users *) thinking that it will only affect the current mount permissions (not permenantly) put it did change the file system... i realized and cut it in the middle but some corruption was done. and then my fedora gui login screen was missing any username. tried to fix that by going to my fedora and executing chown (once using --from , and once without --from) and changed all root file system recursively to be owned by root and then changed my /home/myuserName ownerships all recursively to be owned by myUserName after that... still the system is corrupted..... when i login to genome i have several crash messages (gdiskutility is one of them) and networking is disabled (i cannot connect to neither wireless nor wired nor wireless broadband). also when i plug USB/esata harddisks nothing happens
now i can only do work from my external harddisk`s suse linux. what can i do to restore my system ? I have a previous dd image of my entire harddrive, but it is more than one month old and also I don`t want to do a restore to my entire harddrive.. can i clone some ownerships from files in dd image to their corresponding ones in my fedora system ? if so, how can i even mount a dd image ?
From Ubuntu 11.04 installer. What does this mean? how do I do it correctly?
View 11 Replies View RelatedOkay, so on occasion when I boot into ubuntu I get this error
[mount: mounting /dev /root/dev failed: no such file or directory]
[mount: mounting /dev /root/sys failed: no such file or directory]
[mount: mounting /dev /root/proc failed: no such file or directory]
[code]...
I get the error when I open any of the kernel versions or any recovery mode. Ubuntu 10.10 Desktop is the only OS installed on the computer, which is a Lenovo S10-3. I can eventually get it to go away, sometimes by repeatedly unplugging it and plugging it back in, and sometimes I will boot into GParted, do nothing, then restart and it will work.I have found some solutions online, but all of them involve the error happening as a result of dual booting with Windows.I have made no major system changes recently, so I can't see anything like that being the problem.
Just the last day or so, I've noticed a long pause when I boot my laptop, with lots of disk activity. dmesg says:
[Code]...
Why would there be a 15-second pause (during which the disk is slammed) between mounting root and mounting swap? During this time I see nothing but a blank purple screen, there are no cycling dots or text scroll. Is this normal and I'm just freaking out over nothing because there's no indicator of progress? GRUB default boot options: quiet splash nomodeset video=uvesafb:mode_option=1920x1200-24,mtrr=3,scroll=ywrap vt.handoff=7
I wan to mount a custom hardware's USB file system. I am using Lucid Lynx.When I used the command$ sudo mount -t usbfs none /proc/bus/usbThere was an error as there was no/proc/bus/usbI tried to put it in fstab entry so that /proc/bus/usb will be mounted at boot but no luck.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI made a modification to the /etc/fstab using Ubuntu 10.04 and now it wont boot correctly. I can get the cli but when I enter /etc/fstab and make an edit it says" changing permission of /etc/fstab: read only file system"How can I mount the partition so that I can edit it
View 6 Replies View RelatedI have two hard drives in my desktop, a 250GB and 500GB.
The first drive has the swap and / the second drive is just sat there having to be mounted before use. I have a half remembered thought that the second drive could be given a mount point within the file system. I have often partitioned drives so that / is septate to /home but not over different phisical drives. I wouldn't want the 500GB to be /home because a large chunk of the 250GB would not normally be used.
What I would like is to have the first drive set 20GB / the rest to /home. Then the 500GB set to /home/data so it would apear within the home directory or even better /home/user/data as I'm the only user of the computer.