| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sigriston
n00b
Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Posts: 10
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2003 5:16 am Post subject: OpenBSD 3.3 UFS partition mounting |
 |
|
I couldn't find this on the forum using the search, so if it was already answered, I'm sorry...
Anyways, on to the problem: I have a hard disk with a single OpenBSD 3.3 UFS partition, and I want to mount it read-only on my machine, which is running gentoo with gentoo-sources-2.4.20-r5.
I have compiled the above mentioned kernel with advanced partition schemes, BSD disklabel support (the menuconfig option says FreeBSD disklabels, but I've chosen it since it's the only option mentioning disklabels) and the read-only UFS support.
Still, any attempt to mount the partition (which is on /dev/hdc) failed the following way:
| Code: |
# mount -t ufs -o ufstype=44bsd /dev/hdc4 /mnt/bsd/
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hdc4,
or too many mounted file systems
|
Can anyone help this n00b?
Thanks in advance,
_________________
-- thiago |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hellbringer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2003 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
How have you compiled UFS, module o built in?
If module remember you have to load it before trying to mount.
_________________
There is a lot of novelty and truth in what you say, but that which is true is not novel and that which is novel is not true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sigriston
n00b
Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello there, hellbringer!
As for your question: I've compiled it as a module, and it seems to be loaded... At least that's what old friend lsmod tells me:
| Code: |
# lsmod
Module Size Used by Not tainted
ufs 53856 0 (autoclean)
|
I'm starting to think that perhaps I need to recompile the mount program, since I only got the binaries for it (my installation was made with stage3 + GRP from the 1.4 final CDs)... Does anyone out there think this might work? Or... is there something else I might try?
As usual: thanks a lot!
_________________
-- thiago |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellbringer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2003 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I beleive recompiling mount won't solve the problem but you can try.
Are you absolutely sure that /dev/hdc4 is your BSD partition?
Remember: disk labels! = disk partitions.
Anyway I'm absolutely sure that you can mount BSD partitions since I mounted once long time ago.
_________________
There is a lot of novelty and truth in what you say, but that which is true is not novel and that which is novel is not true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sigriston
n00b
Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2003 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You've got quite a point there! First of all, recompiling mount won't help me...
Now, when it comes to disklabels, I think the problem is there...
For you see, I think the kernel is not recognizing my disklabels at all! The disk with the (single) OpenBSD partition is /dev/hdc. I'm absolutely sure of it.
Even though, all I get on /dev is /dev/hdc and /dev/hdc4 (there are also /dev/discs/disc2/part4). It seems to me that (I'm definitely not sure about it) disklabels, being different from disk partitions (as you accurately pointed out), appear as logical partitions, ie, something like /dev/hda5, 6, 7 etc...
That is not the case here so I'm starting to think that there might be something wrong with the kernel recognizing my disklabels!
I got two weird things at dmesg, that made me think about it:
| Code: | Partition check:
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun0: p1 p2
/dev/ide/host0/bus1/target0/lun0: [PTBL] [2498/255/63] p4
p4: <openbsd: >
|
and
| Code: | ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
ufs was compiled with read-only support, can't be mounted as read-write
|
If anyone knows what could be happening, I need some help!
Thanks in advance,
_________________
-- thiago |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellbringer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I now remember that you can't mount BSD partions as read-write, try adding the "ro" option to the mount command, and try mounting /dev/hdc and not /dev/hdc4. hope this helps.
_________________
There is a lot of novelty and truth in what you say, but that which is true is not novel and that which is novel is not true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sigriston
n00b
Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2003 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice suggestion!
The problem was much simpler than I thought: you have to explicitely specify the read-only option! I think this issue is module-related, since iso9660 for instance has no problem recognizing the filesystem as read-only even if you don't pass the 'ro' option!
Anyways, the working line was:
| Code: | | mount -t ufs -o ro -o ufstype=44bsd /dev/hdc4 /mnt/bsd |
Thanks a lot, hellbringer!
_________________
-- thiago |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellbringer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2003 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sigistron wrote: | | I think this issue is module-related, since iso9660 for instance has no problem recognizing the filesystem as read-only even if you don't pass the 'ro' option! |
Not actually, as far as i can tell, you don't have to pass the ro option with iso9660 since the media is already ro, however if the media is rw, then you have to specify. Furthermore, for forward compatibility (that is, when wite support for FFS is supported) it should be mounted rw by default, so scripts and programs made now will still work in the future.
_________________
There is a lot of novelty and truth in what you say, but that which is true is not novel and that which is novel is not true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Other Things Gentoo
