Missing /cdrom2.loop mount point and missing entry in the fstab of Knoppix 5.0.1 (3rd try)
Hello,
I have proposed a way to boot several version of Knoppix from the iso
file stored on the disk drive
(which is in my opinion an improvement of the fromhd= cheatcode using
the KNOPPIX file within the iso)
Since the knoppix kernel and the official initrd.gz do not have native
support for ntfs, and the official linuxrc script
do not handle properly the double loop back require to mount the iso cd
image before accessing the KNOPPIX
compressed file system (cloop), I have modified the boot ramdisk
minirt.gz of several versions of Knoppix
in order to allow/help the iso boot of Knoppix from various devices,
partitions and boot loaders. This includes boot
from a USB dongle, ntfs, ext2/3, reiser, fat16/32 partitions and a 11MB
virtual machine (with the vm-tools installed)
You will find more about this in here:
http://www.knoppix.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11796
With the last release of Knoppix 5.01 I found an interesting problem
where the /cdrom2.loop mount point disappeared.
The /cdrom2.loop mount point doesn't show up and has no entry in the
/etc/fstab and as such cannot be remounted
as read/write in order for the user to write data to the (ntfs)
partition used to host the iso file and boot Knoppix from.
Previous versions of Knoppix do not exhibit this problem. KNOPPIX 5.0
DVD 2006-02-25 works just fine.
To illustrate this, please find below the output of the mount and df
commands for Knoppix 5.0 and 5.01:
Knoppix 5.0 mount:
==============
/dev/root on / type ext2 (rw)
/proc on /proc type proc (rw)
/sys on /sys type sysfs (rw)
/dev/sda1 on /cdrom2.loop type ntfs
(uid=1000,gid=1000,iocharset=euc-jp) <<<===
/dev/cloop on /KNOPPIX type iso9660 (ro)
/dev/cloop2 on /KNOPPIX2 type iso9660 (ro)
/ramdisk on /ramdisk type tmpfs (rw,size=805776k)
/UNIONFS on /UNIONFS type unionfs
(rw,dirs=/ramdisk=rw:/KNOPPIX=ro:/KNOPPIX2=ro,delete=whiteout)
/cdrom2.loop/boot/knoppix.500/*.iso on /cdrom/ type iso9660
(ro,loop=/dev/loop0)
/dev/cloop on /KNOPPIX type iso9660 (ro)
/dev/cloop2 on /KNOPPIX2 type iso9660 (ro)
/proc on /proc type proc (rw)
/proc/bus/usb on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw,devmode=0666)
/dev/pts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw)
Knoppix 5.0 df:
===========
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/root 5.8M 346K 5.5M 6% /
/dev/sda1 59G 58G 652M 99% /cdrom2.loop <<<===
/dev/cloop 4.6G 4.6G 0 100% /KNOPPIX
/dev/cloop2 3.1G 3.1G 0 100% /KNOPPIX2
/ramdisk 787M 7.5M 780M 1% /ramdisk
/UNIONFS 8.5G 7.7G 780M 91% /UNIONFS
/cdrom2.loop/boot/knoppix.500/*.iso 3.9G 3.9G 0 100% /cdrom/
/dev/cloop 4.6G 4.6G 0 100% /KNOPPIX
/dev/cloop2 3.1G 3.1G 0 100% /KNOPPIX2
Knoppix 5.0.1 mount:
================
/dev/root on / type ext2 (rw)
/ramdisk on /ramdisk type tmpfs (rw,size=810020k)
/UNIONFS on /UNIONFS type unionfs
(rw,dirs=/ramdisk=rw:/KNOPPIX=ro,delete=whiteout)
/cdrom2.loop/boot/knoppix.501/*.iso on /cdrom/ type iso9660
(ro,loop=/dev/loop0)
/dev/cloop on /KNOPPIX type iso9660 (ro)
/proc on /proc type proc (rw)
/proc/bus/usb on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw,devmode=0666)
/dev/pts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw)
/dev/hdc5 on /media/hdc5 type vfat
(rw,nosuid,nodev,umask=000,shortname=winnt,uid=1000,gid=1000)
Knoppix 5.0.1 df:
=============
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/root 5.8M 494K 5.3M 9% /
/ramdisk 792M 6.2M 785M 1% /ramdisk
/UNIONFS 2.7G 2.0G 785M 72% /UNIONFS
/cdrom2.loop/boot/knoppix.501/*.iso 697M 697M 0 00% /cdrom/
/dev/cloop 1.9G 1.9G 0 100% /KNOPPIX
/dev/hdc5 34G 29G 5.5G 84% /media/hdc5
As you can read, there is a missing /cdrom2.loop mount point and a
missing entry in the fstab of Knoppix 5.0.1.
What is the mechanism used by the linux kernel and/or Knoppix to
discover the file systems and fill in the fstab ?
I get the same result when using my 5.0 linuxrc boot script with
Knoppix 5.0.1, so the difference is not in the linuxrc.
Please note that Knoppix 5.0 also have double entry for /dev/cloop and
/dev/cloop2.
It looks like that the mount points discovery and fstab building is a
quite sensitive area.
Anybody have an idea ?
Klaus, is there any major difference between 5.0 and 5.0.1 which could
explain this ?
Thank you very much for your help.
Best Regards,
Gilles
____________________________________________________________________________________
Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call rates
(http://voice.yahoo.com)
Reply to: