![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/6d198f8c8f1c94ccef873cebcf4f5dfa.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Saturday 20 November 2004 07:11 am, Johan Nielsen wrote:
What filesystem is used ?? (then you need to load that module if not present)
Smartest would be ext2/"fat16/32"
I am using reiserfs. I actually have two problems (separate machines). One is as described in the original post. The other machine starts the install as expected. Then I select "Update ..." and when it reaches the spot where it asks which drive to update, I select hda2 (which it recognizes as a SuSE 9.1 system) and it responds that it cannot mount the root partition. I ask it to retry and it never can mount the partition. Anyone know how to get around this? This exactly what I had happen on this XP3000+/512M box, hdc which was ATA133 160G (SuSE 9.0) it liked, hda 120G ATA100 (SuSE 9.1 /) it didn't
Darrell Cormier wrote: like and that was the one I wanted to upgrade. I rsync'd / on /dev/hda1 over to a brand new 160G ATA133 hdc1, it then ran the upgrade, but there was lots of stuff missing that it said it had installed. Next I did a New Installation without formatting the partitions and there just a few config things that had changed, but if you have a backup of /root and /etc, that's not a problem, though in my case, the changes needed were so slight, I just edited the stuff or used YaST to set things right. BTW, I also had the same problem upgrading a x86_64 XP3000+/512M 40G ATA100 HD laptop, 9.1 x86_64 --> 9.2 x86_64, but after a lot of playing around it worked, I don't think it was anything I did as I had been playing around, doing ALT-F2 or F4 and manually mounting the stuff, but that didn't stop the errors, just that it suddenly worked. On this box, I wasn't so lucky. On the P-II/333 64M laptop with 20G HD, a new install went silky smooth.
Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer =====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====