Re: 26th pass at installing 11-3, fails
On Friday, 10 June 2022 08:23:26 EDT gene heskett wrote:
> On Friday, 10 June 2022 02:45:20 EDT gene heskett wrote:
> > On Friday, 10 June 2022 00:45:19 EDT David Wright wrote:
> > > On Thu 09 Jun 2022 at 23:59:06 (-0400), gene heskett wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, 9 June 2022 21:13:53 EDT mick crane wrote:
> > > > > On 2022-06-09 22:15, gene heskett wrote:
> > > > > > Posted once as the original .png of 81k, that didn't get thru
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > server,
> > > > > > then I loaed it up in gimp and smunched it down to about 51k,
> > > > > > ugly
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > still readable, and thats not made it thru the server either.
> > > > >
> > > > > Screenshot_1.jpg(~61 KB) was attached to your previous mail.
> > > > > Noticed as you say that 3 disks were scsi7.
> > > >
> > > > That screenshot never came back to here.
> > >
> > > Is that perhaps because you sent it? (One of the big complaints
> > > about
> > > some MUAs and some email providers.)
> >
> > The second one did come back so I assume it was seen but kmails
> > ability to find your own echo's in a mailing list folder are
> > definitly not its strong point. The scroll scrolls too far per
> > click, going right on by your posts echos. Pretty high torr rating
> > for that suckage. ;o(>>
> > > > In the meantime, I have
> > > > partitioned and formatted that new drive as ext4, gpt partition
> > > > with
> > > > gparted, the whole drive, then printed the info for it from
> > > > fdisk,
> > > > which give the UUID's, 2 different ones, so which should I see in
> > > > the d-i partitioner, the type-UUID or just the UUID, they are
> > > > different numbers, fdisk's info also shows the label as Name:
> > > > slash26, and its is currently /dev/sdd1, but who knows what it
> > > > might
> > > > be to the installer? I'll plug in the drive with the d-i in it,
> > > > and
> > > > retry right now.
> > >
> > > I don't recall seeing UUIDs in the d-i, perhaps because they're so
> > > long. I usually see the entries from /dev/disk/by-id/, or part
> > > thereof.
But thats not long enough to show whats beyond the samsung 870, their's
another alpha label that I'ds the tech in the drive, which in this case
would be positive ID of the correct drive, letters QVC, not EVO like the
earlier production raid drives which are all EVO's. This drive I am
trying to use for the next install, is plugged into the socket labeled
SATA6G_5 on this Z370-AII motherboard. Is this a problem? IDK.
> >
> > There weren't any, but dmesg from another shell allowed me to ID the
> > proper drive. So it now has a 1 partition install on it that won't
> > boot. boot flag is set. And me is puzzled. boot files too far into
> > the
> > drive maybe?
>
> Based on that theory, I may repartition that drive with a 4gig /boot
> and the rest as one big / one, I have run into that a few times
> before.
Welp, I did that, but the installer refuses to set the bootable flag on
that drive, it blinks the remote screen, but when its repainted, its
still off. I went thru the loop, even made a new gpt partition table, but
no joy. and all I have to show for it is a 5 megabyte plus jpeg from my
camera so you'll just have to take my word for it.
I've not had a problem setting the bootable flag before. What might be
the reason?
And it took 3 passes to get rebooted to the old drive because something
happened to the raid but it apparently fixed itself. The bios, apparently
didn't see /dev/sda at all the first time, and it wasn't touched that I
know of.
Thanks all, David Wright in particular.
> > Thanks David.
> >
> > > But bear in mind that /dev/disk/ can be fully listed by the d-i
> > > from
> > > the very start, by switching to a shell on Alt-F2/3.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > David.
> > >
> > > .
> >
> > Cheers, Gene Heskett.
>
> Cheers, Gene Heskett.
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, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
- Louis D. Brandeis
Reply to: