Ubuntu Installation :: Hard Drives And Partitions Work In General?
Apr 14, 2010
I've been through a lot of the posts already, but nothing seems to solve my problem. I have Ubuntu 9.10 and Windows 7 dual installed (Windows was installed first). Everything has been working fine until a few weeks ago when I accidentally left a USB drive plugged in when I restarted my computer from Windows.
Ever since then, whenever I have restarted my computer from Windows grub2 has failed (it does not fail when I restart from Ubuntu). I get a varying message like Grub loading. The symbol ' ' not found. Aborted. Press any key..where the part between the single quotes is usually different each time. When this happens I have to reinstall Grub2 from a live disk, which is becoming a bit of a pain.
I've been reading around, but I don't really have a great understanding yet of how hard drives and partitions work in general, and so I haven't been able to work out what the source of this problem is.
i'm tying to dual boot Vista64 (already installed) and Fedora 10 x86_64. I am running a Dell XPS 410 running 2 sata hard drives raid 0 (ICH8DH). I started the process by shrinking my C drive on disk0 leaving 64.45GB of unallocated space. Next I rebooted into Fedora install DVD and when i get to blue graphical install screen i get message asking if my drive is GPT and if it is it may be corrupted. I click NO, and it comes up with a message telling me i have to initialize my drive if i want to use it ( have to click NO twice) and if i do it i will lose all my data.
i can click no and keep proceding through the install until i get to the partition setup screen. No hard drives or partitions are shown. I've tried googling the problem and get bits of pieces of information scattered in different parts but nothing conclusive to my problem i think. As far as my background of knowledge goes, I'm new to the linux community but give me a thorough guide and i'll do fine (i hope). I've been using fedora on a separate laptop for 2 days now .
I've been struggling with this one for a while - I have three SATA hard drives installed on my system: /dev/sda - an 80 GB disk with three partitions, one NTFS for WinXP, one ext4 for Fedora 11 x86_64, and a boot partition /dev/sdb - a 250 GB disk with one partition, ext4 /dev/sdc - a 250 GB disk with one partition, ntfs
I can mount any partition on /dev/sda without problems - everything works exactly as expected. Attempting to mount a partition from one of the other disks results in something like the following (this is for sdc1):
Code: [User@machine ~]$ sudo mount -t ntfs /dev/sdc1 /mnt/shared [sudo] password for User: ntfs-3g: Failed to access volume '/dev/sdc1': No such file or directory ntfs-3g 2009.11.14 integrated FUSE 27 - Third Generation NTFS Driver XATTRS are on, POSIX ACLS are off
Copyright (C) 2005-2007 Yura Pakhuchiy Copyright (C) 2006-2009 Szabolcs Szakacsits Copyright (C) 2007-2009 Jean-Pierre Andre Copyright (C) 2009 Erik Larsson
Usage: ntfs-3g [-o option[,...]] <device|image_file> <mount_point> Options: ro (read-only mount), remove_hiberfile, uid=, gid=, umask=, fmask=, dmask=, streams_interface=. Please see the details in the manual (type: man ntfs-3g). Example: ntfs-3g /dev/sda1 /mnt/windows Ntfs-3g news, support and information: http://ntfs-3g.org The /mnt/shared directory is created; the failed to access error is related to the disk.
Here is the output from fdisk: Code: [User@machine ~]$ sudo fdisk -l Disk /dev/sdb: 250.0 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x0f970f96
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 30401 244196001 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdc: 250.0 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x1050104f
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 1 30401 244196001 7 HPFS/NTFS Disk /dev/sda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x8e538e53
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 1 6375 51200000 7 HPFS/NTFS /dev/sda2 * 6375 6400 204800 83 Linux /dev/sda3 6400 9729 26743361 8e Linux LVM
Disk /dev/dm-0: 21.4 GB, 21428699136 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 2605 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/dm-0 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/dm-1: 5955 MB, 5955911680 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 724 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/dm-1 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/dm-2: 250.0 GB, 250059348992 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x0f970f96
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/dm-2p1 1 30401 244196001 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/dm-3: 250.0 GB, 250056705024 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30400 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/dm-3 doesn't contain a valid partition table
And also from blkid (this does not match the output from above - but I don't know if this is actually related to the problem or how to fix it): Code: [User@machine ~]$ sudo blkid /dev/sda1: UUID="506412E06412C91C" TYPE="ntfs" /dev/sda2: UUID="811bf259-33d5-4db2-9851-e93b47dcbcc8" SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3" /dev/sda3: UUID="U3AJLH-Lhm1-b0lf-HDX9-ZK1V-ezqU-sb0YGQ" TYPE="lvm2pv" /dev/dm-0: UUID="f5733171-0753-4f53-834b-cc693ffb0aed" TYPE="ext4" /dev/dm-1: TYPE="swap" /dev/mapper/vg_machine-lv_root: UUID="f5733171-0753-4f53-834b-cc693ffb0aed" TYPE="ext4" /dev/mapper/vg_machine-lv_swap: TYPE="swap"
I have a 3 year old PC with 4 internal SATA ports. My old SATA hard drives, all smaller than 2TB, work fine. If I buy a 3TB SATA hard drive, will it work in Linux? Will Linux with GRUB be able boot from such a hard drive without a BIOS upgrade? With a BIOS upgrade? It's fine for me to upgrade my Linux to the newest kernel.
I have a FAT32 external USB hard drive with a bunch of stuff I want to copy onto a RHEL server. Is it as simple as it is on a Mac or PC where I just plug it in and it will show up, then I can copy all the files off of it?If it is, how do I safely remove the drive after I'm done with it?
i installed ubuntu desktop 11.04 on my acer aspire one 751h and found that the wifi didnt work. the netbook remix was the same so i went through all the previous releases up until 126.96.36.199 which worked fine on the live cd. so i tried to install but the installer didnt see my main hard drives only the usb i was using to install. so i tried using wubi installer which only left me with this screen when i tried to load up ubuntu.
I have a Centos 5.5 system with 2* 250 gig sata physical drives, sda and sdb. Each drive has a linux raid boot partition and a Linux raid LVM partition. Both pairs of partitions are set up with raid 1 mirroring. I want to add more data capacity - and I propose to add a second pair of physical drives - this time 1.5 terabyte drives presumably sdc and sdd. I assume I can just plug in the new hardware - reboot the system and set up the new partitions, raid arrays and LVMs on the live system. My first question:
1) Is there any danger - that adding these drives to arbitrary sata ports on the motherboard will cause the re-enumeration of the "sdx" series in such a way that the system will get confused about where to find the existing raid components and/or the boot or root file-systems? If anyone can point me to a tutorial on how the enumeration of the "sdx" sequence works and how the system finds the raid arrays and root file-system at boot time
2) I intend to use the majority of the new raid array as an LVM "Data Volume" to isolate "data" from "system" files for backup and maintenance purposes. Is there any merit in creating "alternate" boot partitions and "alternate" root file-systems on the new drives so that the system can be backed up there periodically? The intent here is to boot from the newer partition in the event of a corruption or other failure of the current boot or root file-system. If this is a good idea - how would the system know where to find the root file-system if the original one gets corrupted. i.e. At boot time - how does the system know what root file-system to use and where to find it?
3) If I create new LVM /raid partitions on the new drives - should the new LVM be part of the same "volgroup" - or would it be better to make it a separate "volgroup"? What are the issues to consider in making that decision?
So windows wouldn't recognize my drives as a raid setup, so I disabled it and switched to IDE, now Ubuntu 9.10 installation will only recognize my drives as RAID. I have and ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe Series motherboard, it has 4 sata connectors and 2 marvel controlled sata connectors. In the 4 sata connectors I have my 2 wd 500gb hds, my dvd burner, and my external usb, esata slots. In the marvel controlled sata connector I have a wd 160gb hd. Originally when I built the computer I wanted a raid setup with the 2 500 gb hds.
But windows wouldn't recognize the raid set-up and wouldn't boot properly. So I said screw it and removed the raid and set all the drives to IDE. Then, when I tried to install Ubuntu 9.04 it would only recognize my 2 500 gb hds as raid. Gparted recognizes the drives as both raid and IDE. Eventually, after a day or two of praying and messing around the installer recognized both drives as raid and IDE. A couple months later here I am trying to install Ultimate Edition 1.4.
I have windows7 on sda1.I have ubuntu natty on sdb1 I just purchased 2 more sata hard drives I have 2 sata burners how do I get my 2 new hard drives to work I plugged them in but no boot screen I have six sata slots
When I tried to install Ubuntu 9.10 or 10.04 (from CD or USB drive), and selected manual partitioning, the installer would not show all my drives.
However, when booting the life CD/USB, gparted or the Disk Utility did recognize all drives and partitions.
It turned out that one of my drives was marked as RAID partition, although I never used RAID!
Here the symptom:
When you run the installer and select "manual partitioning", the resulting list of drives and partitions is incomplete. In my example it was:
sda - sda1 sdc - sdc1
You may have multiple drives with the RAID metadata on it. In that case you need to repeat the above command for all those drives. Just make sure you don't wipe out your existing RAID, if you have one.
Reboot the system and see if it works.
P.S.: Also check your BIOS settings - do you have drives configured as RAID?
I have a SATA drive that worked fine. Then I installed two more hard drives into my system. When these hard drives are installed, if I try to access the SATA drive in Linux, it will start lightly clicking and then the drive will become unavailable. If I power on the machine without the other two hard drives then it works fine. What could be causing this to happen? I don't think it's heat because the two hard drives are far away from the SATA drive.
Having a little problem with 10.04 installation. I have two hard drives installed on my PC. One that had Hardy Heron and one data. When the install program launches from a CD boot, it fails and drops me to a live session to check out the problem. I can see both drives and mount them but if I then launch the installer, it does not give either as an option for installation.
When i try to install ubuntu 10.04 on my desktop i get through the first 3 steps which are Language, Region, and Keyboard. when i get to Prepare partitions, there is nothing there (same problem with 9.10). I followed the steps of another thread about removing the raid settings and I am sure i did that correctly but it did not work, when i try to find my drives in terminal they can not even be found.
Both of my drives are SATA, one is 250gb, other is 500gb. They are both recognized by other operating systems. I have switched the SATA headers that they are plugged into. I really am just not sure what else to do here. Im not totally stupid at linux, ive been using it for a few years and i have taken two classes for linux in the past year. I really feel dumb for not being able to figure this out :/
Alright so i'm trying to install ubuntu 11.04 except it's not recognizing my hard drives. I have two 80gigs plugged in via sata. And neither of them are being recognized by ubuntu. I have tried plugging them in together, and separately, still nothing. I'm getting pretty frustrated. Ubuntu 11.04 just doesn't seem to be working for me. I can run from the liveCD, but i get no unity desktop environment
I am installing Ubuntu on my server that has 2 2tb disk drives. My plan for this server is to set it up as my web server (using apache), will need a mysql database and would like a ftp site. I could really use some advice on how to partition the hard drives.
i am new in Linux. i have two drives one IDE and other SATA in my computer.i want to keep windows XP , WIndows 2003 server on one drive and two flavours of linux on the other drive, let say oopen suse and redhat.please help me how i install these sofwares to make multi boot the machine.
I am attempting to install on a HP ML110 box. It has 2 SATA drives installed. From the live cd I can do fdisk -l and see both drives, I can see both from GPated but during the actual install it doesn't see any drives in which to install.
I would like to install Ubuntu 10.04 on my new 1 TB hard drive. I currently have Windows XP installed on a 160 GB hard drive for things that I cannot do on Ubuntu. I would like to know if it's possible to install the other hard drive, and then dual boot Windows with it? Effectively dual booting across two hard drives. I wouldn't care if GRUB replaces the standard Windows bootloader, just as long as I can choose between the two at startup
I have been trying to install Ubuntu on my new computer as a duel boot with Windows 7. My computer has four 1TB hard drives, One with Windows 7 installed, two that are used for storing media (both are independent, not in a RAID or anything like that) and one empty hard drive. This hard drive contains a 901.51 GB NTFS partition, and 30.00 GB of Unallocated space, I wish to install Ubuntu in this unallocated space; giving it 20 GB (the 10 GB left over might be used for installing XBMC Live). But when I boot Ubuntu's Live CD the installer doesn't show me the unallocated space, and doesn't really show me any of the extra Hard drives.
I installed Ubuntu 10.04 in a Raid 0. The install went fine. When I shut down my machine then boot it back up it shows no raid volumes defined and my hard drives as offline. Then the Disk boot error message. I am new to Unbuntu and I am sure the solution is simple I just need to know what to do.
Is there any performance degradation or complications that arise from having Linux installed on a separate, physical hard disk from Windows in a dual-boot setup? I have a computer that I'd like to dual-boot Ubuntu and Windows but the current hard drive is quite fragmented and the Windows partitioner won't allow me to make a partition large enough to comfortably run Linux+several gigabytes of media that need to be stored. The rig, however, may have room for another internal drive, so I thought that having a separate physical disk reserved completely to Linux would be an easy solution. The tech guy at the local computer store suggested there might be difficulties with this configuration because one drive needs to be the "master" and the other a "slave", resulting in boot complications.
I'm working with an older PC that belongs to my parents. They've been using Ubuntu 8.04 with no problems, and with 10.4s release, I planned to upgrade them to the newest version. The system's specs are as follows: 1.5ghz Athlon XP CPU 1.5gb RAM (PC 2700) 20gb hdd (IDE)
I have tried both the Ubuntu 9.10 (two different discs) and a 10.4 install CD and both give me the same issue. The installation proceeds along swimmingly until partitioning comes up. The partition table simply shows no hard drives. I have heard of this issue occurring with SATA drives and motherboard settings, but what could make it happen to an old IDE drive? Any odd-ball motherboard settings or anything that might need to be changed? GParted and the Live disc (along with the currently installed version of Ubuntu) recognize drives and can navigate them. What gives?
I'm trying to install Ubuntu 10.10 64-bit on my laptop HP pavilion 3046ee . When I reach the partition part , it doesn't detect the Windows 7 os , and doesn't detect any hard disk partitions ( it sees the whole hard disk as one unallocated partition ). I faced the same problem when I tried Ubuntu 10.04 LTS.
I am building a home server that will host a multitude of files; from mp3s to ebooks to FEA software and files. I don't know if RAID is the right thing for me. This server will have all the files that I have accumulated over the years and if the drive fails than I will be S.O.L. I have seen discussions where someone has RAID 1 setup but they don't have their drives internally (to the case), they bought 2 separate external hard drives with eSata to minimize an electrical failure to the drives. (I guess this is a good idea)I have also read about having one drive then using a second to rsync data every week. I planned on purchasing 2 enterprise hard drives of 500 MB to 1 GB but I don't have any experience with how I should handle my data
I'm trying to install jessie on a new computer, but the installer does not see the hard drives. I copied the DVD-1 iso to a usb stick with dd (also tried the netinstall) and it boots, but when I get to partitioning, it only sees the usb drive. If I go to another virtual console and run dmesg or fdisk -l, all drives are seen correctly.
Back up a little - at first I tried the on-board raid, but when the installer couldn't see the drives, I went back into the bios and reset the sata mode to ahci. I've got it set to use bios/legacy OS, or whatever it's called, fast boot is disabled. Even if only one drive is connected, the debian installer does not see it. Then I read up on the fake raid I was trying to use and decided to go with software raid. Can't do that if there's no hard drives listed in the partitioner.
My own installer (refractainstaller) does work, and I've installed jessie with it a couple of times onto one drive, but I really wanted to use raid and lvm, and my installer doesn't do either of those things. No optical drive, but if that's the only way to install, I'll pull the one from my current box and use it for the install. I think I still have a blank CD or DVD lying around.
Hardware: ASUS H97-PLUS LGA 1150 Intel core i3 (the cheapest one at newegg) WD Black 1TB drives (2) GSkill cheap memory, which already passed a memtest.
I installed Ubuntu 7.10 on my desktop a month ago before I left my apartment for winter break. It worked beautifully for the week I used it, but now the computer won't boot. I'm using the ubuntu live cd right now to type this. I can't install it over my last hdd because apparently both of my hdds aren't bootable. I unplugged the computer for the month I was gone and the BIOS date reset to 2004. I'm not sure if that affected anything, whether I need to replace the CMOS battery? The computer was built in 2004 so I'm thinking the battery might be old. Basically the computer functions on the live cd, just won't boot from either hdd.
I'm trying to make a fresh install of Ubuntu 10.04 on my system. I have 9.10 correctly setup on what I see here as devsda2. devsda3 does contain /home. devsda1 is for Vista. They are on a 500Gb hard drive. I also have a second 500Gb hard drive, formerly on a raid 0 with the first one, but now independent (raid deactivated from bios). It is here know as /dev/sdb, and contains other 3 partitions. Raid 0 is not hardware, but is an intel fake raid.
I then have other 4 drives, causing me NO problem.
I start live mode of Ubuntu 10.04 with noraid option. When I try to setup Ubuntu, during the process, where it comes to manually select partitions, the two 500Gb hard drives disappears, such that I'm not able to install Ubuntu on what now is /dev/sda2
If I start live mode of Ubuntu without noraid option, I will see the two 500Gb hd as being part of a raid 0, such that I can't use them.