[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

UUID in fstab?



I edited fstab and replaced /dev/sda1 with UUID=507caf8f-f9cd... (i.e.
an hell of a long string I obtained from blkid /dev/sda1) leaving the
rest of the line unchanged as /bkups  ext3  rw,user,noauto  0  2

Next I rebooted the system, mounted /bkups (no problem) and entered the
command df -h.  The ususal list of partitions were listed and /bkups
still appeared as the mount point for /dev/sda1.

I take it that everything is working ok and if I were to reconnect the
sata drives in a different order the designation /dev/sda1 might change
to something else but mounting /bkups would always access the same
partition?

I raise this question because I am having trouble installing linux-base
and linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64.  The installation of linux-base asked to
change fstab entries to UUID identifiers and I told it to do so.  Later
in the process the installion failed with the message:


Writing extended state information...
Setting up linux-base (2.6.32-15) ...
Logical sector size (15624 bytes) is not a multiple of the physical sector size.
dosfslabel failed: 256 at /var/lib/dpkg/info/linux-base.postinst line 1059, <STDIN> line 10.
dpkg: error processing linux-base (--configure):
 subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 9
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64:
 linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64 depends on linux-base (>= 2.6.32-15); however:
  Package linux-base is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Errors were encountered while processing:
 linux-base
 linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64

and, as the installation failed, fstab was unchanged.  Since the
dosfslabel failed I thought to change the fstab file to use UUID's
before trying to reinstall linux-base.  

Note: I have run dosfsck on the one vfat partition and fskck on the ext3
partitions and the checks found no errors on any of the partitions.

I would appreciate any comments or suggestions regarding this problem

Tom


Reply to: