[opensuse] Installer partition madness
Hello SuSE people, Made a DVD for 11,0 and went to install it. I had planned to use KDE4 and use it as a test machine until I was satisfied that everything worked OK. The partitioner proposal has changed everything around and I am afraid to proceed because I am pretty sure it will mess up my 10.3 and other installed versions of Linux. Now this needs to be explained with some historical background. I originally had two IDE drives installed. hda and hdb. Windows was installed on hda and the rest of it was used for storage, backup, etc. 10.2 was installed on hdb by itself. I then bought a big sata disk to install 10.3 on. The 10.3 installer made the sata disk sda. Then it made hda into sdb and hdb into sdc. Quite unexpected aas it didn't tell me that in the partition scheme. But, it all worked. I posted this strange thing to this list but I got no comments or replies. I have since blown away 10.2 which was on sdc (originally hdb) and was going to install 11,0 there. Back to the 11.0 installer. It couldn't come up with a viable partition scheme and I called up the expert partitioner. Now it shows the disk with the window and storage stuff as sda. (formerly sdb and before that hda) and the disk formerly containing 10,2 as sdb (formerly sdc and before that hdb) And the disk containing 10.3 as sdc (formerly sda) Now you can see why I am afraid. I think the very least it will do is mess up the fstab's and Grub. So,,, to all the hard disk guru's out there what do you think. Ever seen or heard of this before? Any comments, idea's suggestions? BTW this all started with that untested libata garbage. Bob S -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2008/08/06 00:24 (GMT-0400) Bob S apparently typed:
Made a DVD for 11,0 and went to install it. I had planned to use KDE4 and use it as a test machine until I was satisfied that everything worked OK.
The partitioner proposal has changed everything around and I am afraid to proceed because I am pretty sure it will mess up my 10.3 and other installed versions of Linux.
Now this needs to be explained with some historical background. I originally had two IDE drives installed. hda and hdb. Windows was installed on hda and the rest of it was used for storage, backup, etc. 10.2 was installed on hdb by itself.
I then bought a big sata disk to install 10.3 on. The 10.3 installer made the sata disk sda. Then it made hda into sdb and hdb into sdc. Quite unexpected aas it didn't tell me that in the partition scheme. But, it all worked.
I posted this strange thing to this list but I got no comments or replies.
I have since blown away 10.2 which was on sdc (originally hdb) and was going to install 11,0 there.
Back to the 11.0 installer. It couldn't come up with a viable partition scheme and I called up the expert partitioner. Now it shows the disk with the window and storage stuff as sda. (formerly sdb and before that hda) and the disk formerly containing 10,2 as sdb (formerly sdc and before that hdb) And the disk containing 10.3 as sdc (formerly sda)
Now you can see why I am afraid. I think the very least it will do is mess up the fstab's and Grub. So,,, to all the hard disk guru's out there what do you think. Ever seen or heard of this before? Any comments, idea's suggestions?
Each Linux should have its own Grub and fstab that the others don't mess with. Each can be configure additionally by you to add other stanzas as you deem fit, so that if one fails, you have other(s) to try. Don't trust Grub on any MBR. Put it on as many primaries as you have disks. http://en.opensuse.org/Bugs/grub#How_does_a_PC_boot_.2F_How_can_I_set_up_a_w...
BTW this all started with that untested libata garbage.
It got tested, just not enough by enough right people. :-p Remember the old doctor story?: patient: Doc, it hurts when I do this. doc: Then don't do that. I only mix external of one with internal other, and then only occasionally. Either all internal are PATA, or all internal are SATA. Then for any temporary external of different breed, I make any necessary allowance as the case may dictate. Your plight is a standard possible result of mixing SATA & PATA HDs in the same system. If you want to avoid the problem, don't mix. If you have 3 or more SATA ports, put adapters on both PATA and plug them into SATA ports. If you only have 2 SATA ports, pick one disk, and move it into backup duty in an external USB case. Then put an adapter on the other PATA so you can plug it into a SATA port. Then try booting doz. If doz won't boot, and switching SATA ports or BIOS settings doesn't help, reinstall it. Then install 11.0, then use 11.0 to adjust any remaining Linux / and /boot setups you might have left. Before going to all that trouble, you might try manual partitioning prior to launching the 11.0 installer. If you're simply replacing 10.2 with 11.0, there should be no need to change any partitioning. Before you do even that, set labels on all your ext2/ext3 partitions with tune2fs, and whatever tool does the same for any other native partition types. Then change fstab(s) to use labels instead of device names. Do the same in Grub's menu.lst root= parameters. Once that's done, what any device names turn out to be shouldn't matter to 10.2, 10.3 or 11.0. -- "Love is not easily angered. Love does not demand its own way." 1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Bob S wrote:
Now you can see why I am afraid. I think the very least it will do is mess up the fstab's and Grub. So,,, to all the hard disk guru's out there what do you think. Ever seen or heard of this before? Any comments, idea's suggestions?
BTW this all started with that untested libata garbage.
Bob S
Before you start, make note of your current disk configuration. Then, instead of accepting what the install proposes, just configure it the way you want. It will see your existing partitions. I don't have a system being installed handy at the moment, but that option is available in every Suse install I've seen. -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 20:43:36 James Knott wrote:
Bob S wrote:
Now you can see why I am afraid. I think the very least it will do is mess up the fstab's and Grub. So,,, to all the hard disk guru's out there what do you think. Ever seen or heard of this before? Any comments, idea's suggestions?
BTW this all started with that untested libata garbage.
Bob S
Before you start, make note of your current disk configuration. Then, instead of accepting what the install proposes, just configure it the way you want. It will see your existing partitions. I don't have a system being installed handy at the moment, but that option is available in every Suse install I've seen.
-- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org
Reading Bob's original email it is clear that his concern is caused by the fact that the device nodes for each of his hdd's have changed twice; once when he installed 10.3 and now again when attempting to install 11.0. It seems that 10.3 and 11.0 are both detecting the hdd's and allocating device nodes in a different order, both to each other and to the original 10.2 install. Bob - Windows likes to be on the first hdd. It appears that under 10.3 the SATA drives are detected and allocated device nodes before the PATA (IDE) drives. Since the device nodes for hdd's are all now using the /dev/sd[a-z] format with /dev/hd[a-z] being deprecated, the SATA drive appeared as /dev/sa (as expected) but the IDE drives were remapped from /dev/hda and /dev/hbd to /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc (as expected). This could potentially cause problems for booting Windoze which likes to be on the first hdd. It would also appear that 11.0 has modified this behaviour, with the 2x PATA/IDE drives now being reported in their original order, but as /dev/sda and /dev/sdb instead (using the new convention) with the SATA drive coming afterwards. This won't bother Windoze. It also shouldn't bother 10.3 since when it boots it will allocate the device nodes as it does now; 11.0 will cope also. I would suggest though, as someone else did, to label your partitions on both the 10.3 and 11.0 installs (using tune2fs -L <label>) and then modify /etc/fstab to mount by label rather than device node. Use unique labels between 10.3 and 11.0 (I mean don't re-use volume labels across the 2 installs) If you then choose to mount common partitions between your 10.3 and 11.0 installs the system will always mount the correct partition on the correct mount point and the 10.3 and 11.0 fstab entries for that common partition will be the same (so you don't get confused later). I hope that makes it slightly clearer than mud... -- =================================================== Rodney Baker VK5ZTV rodney.baker@iinet.net.au =================================================== Swahili, n.: The language used by the National Enquirer to print their retractions. -- Johnny Hart
On Wednesday 06 August 2008 12:21:26 pm Rodney Baker wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 20:43:36 James Knott wrote:
Bob S wrote:
Now you can see why I am afraid. I think the very least it will do is mess up the fstab's and Grub. So,,, to all the hard disk guru's out there what do you think. Ever seen or heard of this before? Any comments, idea's suggestions?
BTW this all started with that untested libata garbage.
Bob S
Before you start, make note of your current disk configuration. Then, instead of accepting what the install proposes, just configure it the way you want. It will see your existing partitions. I don't have a system being installed handy at the moment, but that option is available in every Suse install I've seen.
-- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org
Reading Bob's original email it is clear that his concern is caused by the fact that the device nodes for each of his hdd's have changed twice; once when he installed 10.3 and now again when attempting to install 11.0. It seems that 10.3 and 11.0 are both detecting the hdd's and allocating device nodes in a different order, both to each other and to the original 10.2 install.
Bob - Windows likes to be on the first hdd. It appears that under 10.3 the SATA drives are detected and allocated device nodes before the PATA (IDE) drives. Since the device nodes for hdd's are all now using the /dev/sd[a-z] format with /dev/hd[a-z] being deprecated, the SATA drive appeared as /dev/sa (as expected) but the IDE drives were remapped from /dev/hda and /dev/hbd to /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc (as expected). This could potentially cause problems for booting Windoze which likes to be on the first hdd.
It would also appear that 11.0 has modified this behaviour, with the 2x PATA/IDE drives now being reported in their original order, but as /dev/sda and /dev/sdb instead (using the new convention) with the SATA drive coming afterwards.
This won't bother Windoze. It also shouldn't bother 10.3 since when it boots it will allocate the device nodes as it does now; 11.0 will cope also.
I would suggest though, as someone else did, to label your partitions on both the 10.3 and 11.0 installs (using tune2fs -L <label>) and then modify /etc/fstab to mount by label rather than device node. Use unique labels between 10.3 and 11.0 (I mean don't re-use volume labels across the 2 installs) If you then choose to mount common partitions between your 10.3 and 11.0 installs the system will always mount the correct partition on the correct mount point and the 10.3 and 11.0 fstab entries for that common partition will be the same (so you don't get confused later).
I hope that makes it slightly clearer than mud...
Felix, John, Rodney Thanks for replying. The muddy water is clearing. (a little) I will take your word for the fact that the device nodes will be properly allocated and everything should work properly I have two questions though. I know that 11.0 will build it's own fstab and make an attempt at Grub.. But will I have to manually edit the 10.3 fstab and grub ? I already have 10.3 mounting with labels and was intending to do that on 11.0 The other thing is I have always wondered how to make sure where the stage 1 boot loader is located. I read the URL Felix provided but am not sure about what it says,-Thanks Felix. That URL says it is best to keep a generic boot loader. Where would that be? But then you say "Don't trust Grub on any MBR. Put it on as many primaries as you have disks." Would that be the line in menu.1st that says "boot=/dev/sd??" Bob S PS Grrrrr....Why do they do this to us ?? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2008/08/06 23:24 (GMT-0400) Bob S apparently typed:
I will take your word for the fact that the device nodes will be properly allocated and everything should work properly
I have two questions though. I know that 11.0 will build it's own fstab and
Naturally.
make an attempt at Grub..
If you tell it to put Grub only on its own /boot or / then it will do fine.
But will I have to manually edit the 10.3 fstab and grub ? I already have 10.3 mounting with labels and was intending to do that on 11.0
Your 10.3 fstab won't be affected. What you need to do with its Grub depends on whether everything else is dependent on it. Odds are they are, and you'll need to add a chainloader stanza to point to the new 11.0 installation, unless it already points there due to having 10.2 the same place previously.
The other thing is I have always wondered how to make sure where the stage 1 boot loader is located. I read the URL Felix provided but am not sure about what it says,-Thanks Felix. That URL says it is best to keep a generic boot loader. Where would that be?
Generic MBR code is what I think you meant, or at least, it meant. Thus, it goes in the MBR.
But then you say "Don't trust Grub on any MBR. Put it on as many primaries as you have disks." Would that be the line in menu.1st that says "boot=/dev/sd??"
Don't know what you're asking. There is no boot=/dev/sd* in any of my menu.lst stanzas. By putting Grub on the MBR, you're inviting windoz to cause Linux to become unbootable by replacing Grub code with generic MBR code. Windoz installation won't stand for the MBR to contain non-generic code. So, put a /boot or / on a primary, and put Grub there. Make that partition active, which allows standard/generic MBR code to start Grub instead of ntldr, thus permitting Grub to give you its menu for choosing what you would like to boot, including windoz. Adding Grub to primaries on other disks gives you something to get the ball rolling if disk order gets swapped around either physically or via BIOS order switching.
PS Grrrrr....Why do they do this to us ??
Depends which they you are referring to. There is a chain of responsibility, and AFAICT, kernel developer Al Viro is the root of this evil as having vetoed a kernel solution to the 14 partition libata limit. Looks like device mapper will soon be a partition limit breaker if it isn't already, which I think it is. -- "Love is not easily angered. Love does not demand its own way." 1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Thursday 07 August 2008 12:06:30 am Felix Miata wrote:
But will I have to manually edit the 10.3 fstab and grub ? I already have 10.3 mounting with labels and was intending to do that on 11.0
Your 10.3 fstab won't be affected.
But the fstab will report the incorrect device node. At least it did so when I installed 10.3. Even though it renamed /dev/hda1 to /dev/sdb1 it was still named /dev/hda1 in the fstab of 10.2
What you need to do with its Grub depends on whether everything else is dependent on it. Odds are they are, and you'll need to add a chainloader stanza to point to the new 11.0 installation, unless it already points there due to having 10.2 the same place previously.
The other thing is I have always wondered how to make sure where the stage 1 boot loader is located. I read the URL Felix provided but am not sure about what it says,-Thanks Felix. That URL says it is best to keep a generic boot loader. Where would that be?
Generic MBR code is what I think you meant, or at least, it meant. Thus, it goes in the MBR.
But then you say "Don't trust Grub on any MBR. Put it on as many primaries as you have disks." Would that be the line in menu.1st that says "boot=/dev/sd??"
Don't know what you're asking. There is no boot=/dev/sd* in any of my menu.lst stanzas.
You don't have a stanza like this in your menu.1st? (Excuse the wrapping please) ###Don't change this comment - YaST2 identifier: Original name: linux### title openSUSE 10.3 root (hd2,7) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.22.18-0.2-default root=/dev/sda8 resume=/dev/sda3 splash=silent showopts initrd /boot/initrd-2.6.22.18-0.2-default
By putting Grub on the MBR, you're inviting windoz to cause Linux to become unbootable by replacing Grub code with generic MBR code. Windoz installation won't stand for the MBR to contain non-generic code.
So, put a /boot or / on a primary, and put Grub there. Make that partition active, which allows standard/generic MBR code to start Grub instead of ntldr, thus permitting Grub to give you its menu for choosing what you would like to boot, including windoz.
Adding Grub to primaries on other disks gives you something to get the ball rolling if disk order gets swapped around either physically or via BIOS order switching.
Bob S -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2008/08/07 22:45 (GMT-0400) Bob S apparently typed:
On Thursday 07 August 2008 12:06:30 am Felix Miata wrote:
But will I have to manually edit the 10.3 fstab and grub ? I already have 10.3 mounting with labels and was intending to do that on 11.0
Your 10.3 fstab won't be affected.
But the fstab will report the incorrect device node. At least it did so when I installed 10.3. Even though it renamed /dev/hda1 to /dev/sdb1 it was still named /dev/hda1 in the fstab of 10.2
11.0 won't affect 10.3's fstab or device nodes any more than it would affect windoz's registry. Device nodes are just files. 11.0 won't touch device node files or fstab on your 10.3 partition unless you mistakenly tell it to install to your 10.3 partition instead of where you really want it to install.
But then you say "Don't trust Grub on any MBR. Put it on as many primaries as you have disks." Would that be the line in menu.1st that says "boot=/dev/sd??"
Don't know what you're asking. There is no boot=/dev/sd* in any of my menu.lst stanzas.
You don't have a stanza like this in your menu.1st? (Excuse the wrapping please) ###Don't change this comment - YaST2 identifier: Original name: linux### title openSUSE 10.3 root (hd2,7) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.22.18-0.2-default root=/dev/sda8 resume=/dev/sda3 splash=silent showopts initrd /boot/initrd-2.6.22.18-0.2-default
Sure, but that's not what you wrote. "boot=/dev/sd" isn't in yours or mine anywhere, and I still don't know what your original question meant to ask. title openSUSE 10.3 root (hd0,6) kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=LABEL=103root showopts noresume splash=0 vga=0x305 initrd /boot/initrd -- "Love is not easily angered. Love does not demand its own way." 1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Friday 08 August 2008 03:23:23 am Felix Miata wrote:
On 2008/08/07 22:45 (GMT-0400) Bob S apparently typed:
You don't have a stanza like this in your menu.1st? (Excuse the wrapping please) ###Don't change this comment - YaST2 identifier: Original name: linux### title openSUSE 10.3 root (hd2,7) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.22.18-0.2-default root=/dev/sda8 resume=/dev/sda3 splash=silent showopts initrd /boot/initrd-2.6.22.18-0.2-default
Sure, but that's not what you wrote. "boot=/dev/sd" isn't in yours or mine anywhere, and I still don't know what your original question meant to ask. title openSUSE 10.3 root (hd0,6) kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=LABEL=103root showopts noresume splash=0 vga=0x305 initrd /boot/initrd -- Whooops !!! My bad ! Don'tknow why I wrote "boot" instead of "root". Senility I guess. The intent of that question is, is this where Grub gets it's, or puts, info for some stage of the boot loader?
Thanks for your patience and guidance Bob S -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2008/08/08 16:12 (GMT-0400) Bob S apparently typed:
On Friday 08 August 2008 03:23:23 am Felix Miata wrote:
Sure, but that's not what you wrote. "boot=/dev/sd" isn't in yours or mine anywhere, and I still don't know what your original question meant to ask. title openSUSE 10.3 root (hd0,6) kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=LABEL=103root showopts noresume splash=0 vga=0x305 initrd /boot/initrd
Whooops !!! My bad ! Don'tknow why I wrote "boot" instead of "root". Senility I guess. The intent of that question is, is this where Grub gets it's, or puts, info for some stage of the boot loader?
Maybe it would help if you understood that menu.lst corresponds to a shell script. Nothing in menu.lst is indispensable to Grub's function as a bootloader. IOW, menu.lst is little more than a (major) user convenience. Anything and everything regarding starting an OS can be done by you typing something at a Grub command prompt, and as long as you type there appropriately, Linux and/or windoz or any other OS Grub knows about will start. The content of menu.lst is after the fact, totally unrelated to getting Grub properly installed. http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/html_node/ HTH -- "Love is not easily angered. Love does not demand its own way." 1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 12:15:50 Bob S wrote:
On Thursday 07 August 2008 12:06:30 am Felix Miata wrote:
But will I have to manually edit the 10.3 fstab and grub ? I already have 10.3 mounting with labels and was intending to do that on 11.0
Your 10.3 fstab won't be affected.
But the fstab will report the incorrect device node. At least it did so when I installed 10.3. Even though it renamed /dev/hda1 to /dev/sdb1 it was still named /dev/hda1 in the fstab of 10.2
You need to understand exactly what is happening here. Device nodes are only relevant to the operating system that you are currently running. Your system has two physical disk controllers - one IDE and one SATA. Each of these controllers has two disk interfaces (I am making an assumption here). Connected to these disk controllers are physical hard disks - two x IDE and one SATA disk. When Linux boots, udev assigns a device node to each physical disk. In the case of 10.2, /dev/hda, /dev/hdb and /dev/sda. 10.3 calls them /dev/sda, /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc where /dev/sda is the SATA disk and /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc are the IDE drives. 11.0 assigns the IDE drives first (as did 10.2) and so you also have /dev/sda, /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc but /dev/sdc is the SATA disk. These device nodes do not exist at boot time and are not recorded on the disk, hence the reference in menu.lst to hd(0,1) which is the second partition on the first physical hard drive. They are created by udev (older systems that don't use udev had the device nodes created at installation time or using the mknod command) and are simply logical files that abstract the actual interface to the hard disk device driver. Remember, in unix "everything is a file". The device nodes may be used by mount to mount the various partitions to previous mount points as defined in /etc/fstab. Each version that you have installed (10.2, 10.3, 11.0) has its own /etc/fstab file. Since the device nodes are created by udev according to predefined rules, they will always be the same for each respective version i.e. when 10.3 is running they will match what is in 10.3's /etc/fstab; likewise when 11.0 is running they will match /etc/fstab on the 11.0 partition. There are two alternatives to mounting by device node - by volume label or by GUID (globally unique identifier). Mounting by volume label is by far the easiest to understand and manually configure. It has been covered in other emails in this thread. In other words, don't be perturbed by the fact that 10.2, 10.3 and 11.0 seem to use different device nodes for the same devices. The only ones that matter are the ones relevant to the currently running version. Hope this helps. -- =================================================== Rodney Baker VK5ZTV rodney.baker@iinet.net.au =================================================== Probable-Possible, my black hen, She lays eggs in the Relative When. She doesn't lay eggs in the Positive Now Because she's unable to postulate how. -- Frederick Winsor
On Friday 08 August 2008 09:07:20 am Rodney Baker wrote: ......<snipped the important stuff>......
In other words, don't be perturbed by the fact that 10.2, 10.3 and 11.0 seem to use different device nodes for the same devices. The only ones that matter are the ones relevant to the currently running version.
Thank you Rodney! An excellent explanation, See! one never stops learning. Bob S -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
participants (4)
-
Bob S
-
Felix Miata
-
James Knott
-
Rodney Baker