Ubuntu :: Mounting Second Drive Within File System?
Jun 9, 2011
I 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.
View 7 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Jan 31, 2010
The situation is say all I have is a windows machine and I remotely connected via ssh to a Linux machine. Is there a way I can mount my local CD-rom on the remote Linux machine?
View 5 Replies
View Related
Jan 13, 2011
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 Related
Jan 28, 2011
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"How can I mount the partition so that I can edit it
View 6 Replies
View Related
Apr 13, 2011
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
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jan 28, 2011
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?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Apr 25, 2011
I 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:
View 14 Replies
View Related
Jun 2, 2009
I have a dual boot system (CentOS and Windows XP Pro). The computer has 2 disks with the operating systems on sda. My data files are on the 2nd disk (sdb I think). I would like to be able to access the data files on sdb from CentOS. I tried issuing the Linux command:mount -oro -t ntfs /dev/sdb1 /mnt/winbut CentOS tells me that ntfs is not a file system it recognizes. Even if I leave out the -t ntfs I get the same message. Any ideas on how I can get access to the Windows files while in the CentOS boot?. I got the idea for the above mount command from the book: Fedora 10 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux Bible byCristopher Negus.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Apr 23, 2011
I really like being able to mount remote file systems using the Places > Connect to Server ... tool on Ubuntu 10.10 -- it makes transferring files a breeze.
Unfortunately, the only way to access a particular server at work (call it Server A), is by first SSHing into an intermediate (Server B), which is the only one with a public ip.
My process for transferring files from Server A is currently:
myComputer $ ssh serverB
serverB $ ssh serverA
serverA $ scp file to serverB; exit
serverB $ scp file to myComputer
Needless to say, this gets tiring, and multiple transfers are slow.
Is there a way to mount serverA directly on my computer (by tunnelling through serverB in the background)? Failing that, how about using sftp?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jan 14, 2011
How do I go about mounting a device if I don't know the file system type (e.g ext3, NTFS)?
View 4 Replies
View Related
Apr 7, 2010
I'm having difficulties mounting an FTP address to my file system automatically during boot. After a bit of research I have discovered a package called curlftpfs, I've installed this package using aptitude and I had no errors.
I've successfully mounted an FTP address manually using curlftpfs at the command line and proved to myself that this is working as it should...However, I can't get this to mount automatically and I am receiving the following error during boot when I try and mount it through /etc/fstab...
Error connecting to ftp: Failed to connect to (IP address of server): Network is unreachable
My research indicates this package should be able to do this.
I'm still a learner when it comes to Linux, but could this be because TCP/IP services are not started at the time of mounting the filesystems? I've tried a continuous ping at this computer whilst it is booting and I don't get a response until after /etc/fstab has been processed. If this is the reason, can I start them these processes earlier?
Another option would be to have a script/command run when the computer boots, but prior to MySQL loading. If this is possible, it would also satisfy my problems.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jun 27, 2010
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.
View 4 Replies
View Related
May 11, 2011
I 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 Related
Sep 3, 2011
If you have a contiguous partial piece of an ext4 file system (assuming it's perfectly clean), starting from the beginning of the partition, is there any way to check it, or to mount it to get the files whose parents, inodes and data are all completely contained inside?
Have (or maybe had) a very large 11TB RAID 6 array, filled with a single large ext4 partition. Something strange happened when a single drive failed and the array ended up failing 13 out of the 11 drives. I had trouble getting the array restarted, and got to the point where I exhausted all of the options I considered completely safe. I considered a few things that may have worked, but mdadm doesn't seem to have a definite "do not change anything" option. So I decided the only way to be absolutely safe would be to clone the disks before proceeding - then I realized how much time that would take and sent the drives off to a recovery service so they could image them and check it out.
Before doing so, I copied the first 2GB from each disk. I XORd the images from the working drives to reconstruct the data chunks that were on the failed disk, manually assembled the chunks, and am very confident that I have 22GB of "correct" data in a single file. The parity and Q syndromes all matched (with RAID 6 you can still check with only 1 missing device). I've learned the fine details of ext4 from [URL], and have looked at lots of raw data from the reconstructed partition, and it all looks good. The recovery company says that they're not finding many inodes, but I found a lot of them, exactly where they're supposed to be. I tried to mount and e2fsk, but both processes seem to be extremely unhappy that the device size doesn't match the size implied by the file system geometry.
I considered hacking the superblock to manually reduce the size, but I figure that wouldn't work because there would then be more group descriptor blocks than it would expect after the superblocks. I might try doing that and compensating by incrementing the "reserve block count" to compensate. Alternatively, if there is some way to make the file appear to be the expected size with nothing but zeroes after the end of the actual data, maybe I could mount it and not get any errors until I cause the kernel to read past the true end of the file.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Sep 7, 2009
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 Related
May 16, 2010
I just rebuild the kernel for slackware 13, everything works, but root file system which is ext3 is mounted as ext2. Normally I've build ext3, ext4 and so on as modules, not in the kernel... but if I do this, then the kernel mounts the file system as ext2, which is build in the kernel. I also modified rc.modules so I can make sure that ext3,ext4,jbd are loaded, but it doesnt work.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Sep 29, 2010
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 Replies
View Related
Apr 25, 2010
I have a problem with my USB drive. When i try to make a file transfer, i get the error message which says that it is a 'read only file system' and i can not transfer any files. While looking for a way to solve the problem, i came across another case similar to what i have now which discussed in this thread: [URL]
However, i didn't understand how to resolve the problem from that thread.
View 6 Replies
View Related
Aug 27, 2010
an idea what might be wrong with fs 0x06 FAT16? I have a mobile, Sony Ericsson K750i, which was mounted in previous distributions without problems (up to 11.1). Now I use 11.2 and I am unable to mount it. I tried to do it via yast, but it says "non-existing or uknokwn file system" even it was recognized as 0x06 FAT16. I read that this fs is outdated, however still supported.
View 5 Replies
View Related
Apr 2, 2010
I'm having problems mounting an Edirol R-09HR digital audio recorder (as a USB drive, to read the recording files) on a system running openSUSE 11.2. fdisk or other partitioning tools recognize the device as a "W95 FAT32" drive with a filesystem code of 0b, apparently. I was under the impression that mounting this as a vfat file system should work, but the mount command dies complaining "FAT: bogus number of reserved sectors" and "VFS: Can't find a valid FAT file system." This happens even with a freshly formatted card in the recorder. The device mounts properly with Windows XP systems and late-model Ubuntu/Kubuntu systems, Any clews as to what I'm doing wrong here?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Aug 22, 2010
I have a 1.5TB Western Digital Caviar Green in a USB 2.0 external setup with an ext4 file system. I'm going to purchase a 2.0TB Western Digital Caviar Green in a USB 2.0 external case, copy the data over and put my 1.5TB in a fire-resistant box in another house. I'm worried about a couple things however:
(1) I'm worried about the long-term viability of _any_ file system years into the future. I've been storing my data on hard drives (instead of CDs, DVDs or BDs) for years now due to their higher reliability than optical disks. However, the file system used in optical disks is UDF which I think has much longer viability into the future. I'm not going to store terabytes of data on optical discs of course, so I'm wondering what I should choose for a hard drive file system. FAT32 or NTFS (due to Windows' 90%+ presence on the desktop, including still being used by Windows 7) may be the best choice, but I much rather have a open source file system, especially one that allows for permissions, timestamps, etc.
(2) As for my 2TB hard drive that I will be using for a while into the future, should I continue to use ext4 (I've had no problem with it thus far), but is there another file system that has better performance when storing and transferring gigs of data?
View 9 Replies
View Related
Feb 7, 2010
What i really need to know is if there is a way to access a Ubuntu file system on a hard drive from a live CD. When i acess it now it just shows the Windows files on it, and i cant access the Ubuntu partition. What happened was this: I was trying to install Ubuntu on an external hard drive. I moved all the settings to the Hard drive so i didnt think it would affect my other drives. I mustve missed one of them because insteading of loading GRUB like it normally does, it came up with GRUB error 21 and did nothing. I tried to fix it, but nothing worked. I finally decided to unplug everything except the external and install it from there, so id atleast have a functioning desktop. As it turns out, my comp doesnt suport USB booting. So the only way i can use my computer is by Live CD. I was trying to fix things so i had both hard drives power supply unplugged. being slightly drowsy from staying up late that night, I plugged them in while my computer was on. the first one went in just fine, no problems. The second one though, also my master drive, i was having troubles pluging in. while i was turning it to fit in, it made a big spark and shocked my master drive. That drive had my MBR and Windows on it. Now It cant find a MBR, and i cant access the ubuntu partition on my slave drive. Is there any way to save this?? im 99.9% sure ive screwed myself over hardcore epically, but im hoping to save at least 1/2 my data.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 12, 2010
Last night I was making a boot usb drive with usb startup creator onto a USB external well I, messed up and lost the partition table for 2 USB drives: my 500 gb hard drive was pluged in whilst i was doing this silly i know it was partitioned 251 gb its now showing as 500 gb but the data is still on drive it seems the file system is gone or damaged
View 2 Replies
View Related
Oct 19, 2010
Every time when I right click the USB drive icon and select "Safely remove drive" I always get this error message
FAILED: No such file or directory
even though the icon does disappear from the desk top. I have been ignoring it since the USB drive seems working fine.Now I have a more serious problem. When I tried to copy files onto the USB drive it says "read only file system" and doesn't let me. I tried unplug and plug the USB key but that doesn't help.
View 5 Replies
View Related
Jul 14, 2011
when I load into Ubuntu 11.04 from my USB drive, why can't I access the files on my internal hard drive? I mount the drive but I cannot see any of the music, videos or documents contained on that drive (which is also an Ubuntu 11.04 drive). I was wondering so I could copy those files onto my external hard drive and reinstall since my Ubuntu crashed.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 17, 2009
I'm going to be getting myself a TB drive for general purpose storage later on this month/beginning of April and I'm looking for opinions on what file system to use on the drive. Currently I have a couple of large drives, from ~250 - ~500 gig, formatted as ext3 but once in a while I have to wait for ages for a fsck to run. I know I can disable it if I want, or use another file system but just don't...
I've read that ext4 is hugely improved over ext3 in a number of ways, the time taken to do these scans included. But saying that I've also read, can't remember the source, that the one "huge" problem with Linux is the way it deals with large partitions, i.e the time taken to scan the drive for errors.So in a round-about way, what options do I have for a reliable, fast file system for large drives? I know there's plenty of documentation on the net about this, and I'm reading those, but I want some "real-life" opinions.Is ext4 stable enough to use now? What about JFS/XFS/ReiserFS etc?
View 5 Replies
View Related
Aug 29, 2011
I'm setting up a Backup & Media server, which will be running debian. I will setup a small HD or SSD/CF card for the OS, and a MD raid for the data drives.The total size of the raid will be either 3 or 4TB, depending. Now, I need to figure out what filesystem to use on top of this raid.My criteria is as follows:
1. Support for large files. I can't imagine anything larger than about 1.2TB, but the 4GB of, say, fat32 just isn't enough.
2. Robust. I don't want it falling apart on me; nothing too unstable.
3. (and this is most important): Good Undelete support. I got burned recently when a software glitch managed to rm -rf my EXT4 drive. All the file data is still there, but all the metadata is gone. I *DO NOT* want that happening with this. I want to be able to do a "RM / -RF", immediately unmount it, and then recover *all* of the deleted data. Obviously, when data is overwritten it's overwritten, but I don't want to lose all my metadata if a "RM -RF" happens. FAT-32 is the model I'm looking at: You can usually recover deleted files if anything happens to the drive.
So, what are my options?EXT2 looks like a possibility. EX4 is *clear out*, unless there's some nice utility/mode that keeps a backup of all deleted metadata etc.
View 11 Replies
View Related
May 31, 2010
I installed ubuntu off of my laptop and put the Ubunto file system on a 1TB hard drive off of a drive enclosure. Now the only way I can access Windows is if the drive is still connected to the laptop. NO EXTERNAL HD No BOOT MENU when I boot up.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Sep 21, 2009
I have a videos server here at work running Mandriva 2009 Spring and I need to copy a 10 gig file from it to a USB drive. The drive needs to be readable and writable from Windows. The file size rules out FAT, and when I try to write to it when formatted as NTFS I get an error about it being a read-only file system. How can I get NTFS support up and running?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jun 4, 2011
I have Ubuntu installed in a virtual machine (VirtualBox) with a separate virtual drive that receives rsync backups of some of my online servers.Itns a series of 4 rsync commands. The first two ran fine, not sure about the third and the fourth wrote nothing. The error in rsync said the file system was read only. I confirmed the whole drive was read only, but it did not start that way.I rebooted and the fourth rsync ran fine. I think this is a linux issue and not a VM issue, but it is clearly mounting in r-w and for some reason changed on it own to read only.Does anyone have any idea why this might occur?It is mounted through fstab with the line:UUID=84d4bc5c-7a68-4096-9725-214f2e8b713e /BackupDrive ext3 defaults 0 2
View 4 Replies
View Related
