Re: disk size mismatch issue during install on ultra1
One trick to consider. If it's not a boot disk, use an MSDOS / PC
label. The kernel can still read it and it's a lot less flaky than the
Sun scheme. One issue I have had with large disks and Sun labels (but
this only occurred on a 40G volume) is that the disk did not work right
with a Sun label, and I had to use PC instead to get it to work at all.
Can another helpful D-I or Sun internals person talk a little about
disk labels? They seem to be a little odd and I do not understand why
they cause such problems.
Another thing to try: zorch the hell out of the disk label with dd
if=/dev/zero of=/dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/disc bs=1M
Then redo it with parted's CHS numbers: 8637,64,32. I have noticed
parted and SPARC fdisk tend to take the label as gospel truth even when
it's stuffed full of inaccurate crap. I bet if you erase the label and
recreate it, this problem should stop happening. That was another trick
I needed to use to get going at one point.
Another thing, get the proper CHS numbers from the disk maker and type
those in to the label creation command in parted. This should help you
with your geometry problem.
HTH!
--- Ardo van Rangelrooij <ardo@debian.org> wrote:
> foo_bar_baz_boo-deb@yahoo.com (foo_bar_baz_boo-deb@yahoo.com) wrote:
> > I had an issue similar to this one when installing on an Ultra 2
> with a
> > similar setup.
> >
> > I found I could get around the problem by selecting the execute a
> shell
> > option in the debian installer, then running parted on the disk
> > manually.
> >
> > One thing I cannot remember that you will need to find out in order
> to
> > do this is the proper device name for your disks. The name
> convention
> > used by the installer kernel is really bizarre and I do not
> understand
> > how it works.
> >
> > Hopefully the D-I people on this list will be able to explain what
> > device names your disks might be using, or you can reverse engineer
> it
> > from the install screens.
> >
> > --- Ardo van Rangelrooij <ardo@debian.org> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've got an interesting issue with installing sarge on an ultra1:
> At
> > > the
> > > beginning of the partitioning the 9GB HD's are detected correctly
> as
> > > having
> > > 9GB. However, when configuring the 1st partition as 4GB, the
> > > partition size
> > > is reported as 2GB in the partition info screen. When I continue
> > > there's
> > > only some 27MB left. When using guided partitioning I get
> similar
> > > results
> > > (1.9GB + 99MB) and the partitioning even fails with an error
> message
> > > stating
> > > that there are too many primary partitions.
> > >
> > > I'm using the netboot from April 24 and both 2.4 and 2.6 fail.
> Older
> > > netboots
> > > (e.g. rc3) also fail here. The ultra1 has OBP v3.35 and
> probe-scsi
> > > detects
> > > the HD's correctly. It has 256MB memory.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts/hints/help how to get across this hurdle? I looked
> > > through the
> > > bug reports for d-i but didn't find anything about this issue.
>
> Thanks for the tip. I'm a step closer. When running parted by hand
> I get
>
> /bin # parted /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/disc print
> Warning: The disk CHS geometry (8637,64,32) does not match the
> geometry stored
> on the disk label (1107,27,133).
> Ignore/Cancel? c
>
> Information: Don't forget to update /etc/fstab, if necessary.
>
>
> Unfortunately running
>
> parted /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/disc mklabel sun
>
> does NOT resolve this. The geometry mismatch persits.
>
> I'll run fdisk on this disk in another machine and see what gives.
>
> Thanks,
> Ardo
> --
> Ardo van Rangelrooij Debian
> XML/SGML Group
> <ardo@debian.org>
> <debian-xml-sgml-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org>
> http://people.debian.org/~ardo/
> http://debian-xml-sgml.alioth.debian.org/
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
Reply to: