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

Re: So much for a wheezy install, massive fail



On Thursday 22 January 2015 01:59:39 Bob Proulx did opine
And Gene did reply:
> Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Bob Proulx did opine
> > 
> > And Gene did reply:
> > > > Go ahead and install its way, then run an fdisk -l and read the
> > > > result, confirmed by quite slow readings from hdparm -tT on the
> > > > drive you just installed it to.
> > > 
> > > What problem are you seeing?  Details?
> 
> I assume the above links to the below:
> > gene@coyote:~/Downloads$ parted /dev/sdb unit s print
> > WARNING: You are not superuser.  Watch out for permissions.
> > Model: ATA ST1000VX000-1CU1 (scsi)
> > Disk /dev/sdb: 1953525168s
> > Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B
> > Partition Table: gpt
> > 
> > Number  Start       End          Size         File system     Name 
> > Flags
> > 
> >  1      16384s      112656383s   112640000s   ext4                 
> >  boot 2      112656384s  215056383s   102400000s   linux-swap(v1) 3 
> >      215062155s  317460464s   102398310s   ext4
> >  4      317460465s  1953520064s  1636059600s  ext4
> 
> But that wasn't created by the debian-installer.  That partition
> scheme must have been created by some other tool.  The Wheezy
> debian-installer will create this following type of layout from this
> example system.
> 
>   Number  Start      End        Size       Type      File system    
> Flags 1      2048s      999423s    997376s    primary   ext2
>    2      999424s    17000447s  16001024s  primary   linux-swap(v1)
>    3      17002494s  78163967s  61161474s  extended
>    5      17002496s  78163967s  61161472s  logical   ext4
> 
> Note that partitions sda1, sda2, and sda5 are all aligned properly for
> AF 4k drives.  Note that sda1 is /boot but the debian-installer does
> not set the boot flag.  The first partition sda1 will start at sector
> 2048.  All of these are different from what you show.  Therefore it
> must have been created by a different tool.

I was, I screwed around again last night and set it up again, using 
gparted, until everybody was happy.  So now it looks like this:

gene@coyote:~/Downloads$ sudo parted /dev/sdb unit s print
[sudo] password for gene: 
Model: ATA ST1000VX000-1CU1 (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 1953525168s
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B
Partition Table: gpt

Number  Start       End          Size         File system     Name  Flags
 1      4130s       2072384s     2068255s     ext4
 2      2072385s    104470694s   102398310s   ext4
 3      104470695s  141334694s   36864000s    linux-swap(v1)
 4      141334695s  1953520064s  1812185370s  ext4

gdisk says its ok, has a protective MBR but is using GPT. So probably the 
thing to do is get another disk, install to it, then copy it all to a good 
disk. That would at least get it onto this disk without the installers 
partitioner touching it.  Worth the effort?  At this point I am not sure.
> 
> > Which it is not complaining about.  BUT that is not how I spent an
> > hour partitioning it last night, zero resemblance, partitions 2 & 3
> > were specced with  50G's for swap and /, the last, big one is /home.
> 
> If it wasn't you and it wasn't the debian-installer then it must have
> been someone else.  Someone must have repartitioned those when you
> weren't looking.  Do you have a cat?  I always suspect the cat.  :-)
> 
> Bob

Nah, she was 20 something and toothless, so we had her take a long nap 
about 3 years ago.  So much as I'd like to, I can't blame it on the cat. 
The woof has COPD, and no longer can care for a pet. I might get a dog 
again if she falls over first.  We had a Sheltie for about 10 years, 
excellent pet but the short life surprised us both.  I still catch myself 
setting a cereal or ice cream bowl on the floor for him to cleanup, 10+ 
years later.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
US V Castleman, SCOTUS, Mar 2014 is grounds for Impeaching SCOTUS


Reply to: