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

Re: dosfslabel finds problem, e2fsck does not

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 15:58:59 -0400, Thomas H. George wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 07:23:31PM +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:25:42 -0400, Thomas H. George wrote:
> > > My system, Squeeze, cannot install the latest kernel image because
> > > dosfslabel finds a problem that prevents the installation of linux-base.
> > > 
> > > Trying to resolve this I used e2fsck to check each of the disk
> > > partitions and e2fsck reported all the partitions clean.  However, the
> > > result of running dosfslabel /dev/hda1 results in the following output:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > There are differences between boot sector and its backup.
> > > Differences: (offset:original/backup)


> > >   Not automatically fixing this.
> > > NO NAME    
> > > 
> > > This hard drive used to have windoze installed and could be booted.  The
> > > windoze partition was reformated to be an ext2 partition.


> > The first thing I would do is to check for signatures of other
> > filesystems that were left behind on /dev/hda1:
> > 
> >   wipefs /dev/hda1


> No luck.  wipefs removed two bits

That is better in any case; such stale additional signatures cause
problems for blkid.

>                                   but the output of dosfstab was
> unchanged.  I tried aptitude -f install and the installation of
> linux-base still failed as shown below:


> The following partially installed packages will be configured:
>   linux-base linux-image-2.6-amd64 linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64 
> No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
> 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 50 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B will be used.
> 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


> I assume the problem is with /dev/hda1 as the output of dosfslabel run
> on any other partition is: Logical sector size is zero.

OK, the normal way to fix the "differences between boot sector and its
backup" problem on a vfat filesystem is:

  fsck.vfat -ar /dev/hda1

(The filesystem should be unmounted for this procedure.)

However, I have never had to use it on an ext3 partition and I have no
idea if is safe, therefore I am hesitant to recommend it to you.
(Fsck.vfat will overwrite the backup of the boot sector with its current
content, making the two identical again.)  

I would like to see your output of

  wipefs /dev/hda1

(to verify that the ext3 signature has the normal offset) and also the
output of

  fdisk -l /dev/hda

to check if the partition type is correct.

Regards,            |
          Florian   |

Reply to: