Linux Help
guides forums blogs
Home Desktops Distributions ISO Images Logos Newbies Reviews Software Support & Resources Linuxhelp Wiki

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )



Advanced DNS Management
New ZoneEdit. New Managment.

FREE DNS Is Back

Sign Up Now
> Partition Problems, Is Drake 9.x broken for large drives?
igor
post Mar 10 2004, 08:22 PM
Post #1


Whats this Lie-nix Thing?
*

Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 10-March 04
Member No.: 2,556



I'm running Mandrake 9.2 on an AMD K6-450 MoBo with a 1998 Award BIOS, have an Adaptec SCSI running four IBM disks, two 4GB, one 5GB, one 9GB. The two 4GB and the 9GB howl like banshees, so I decided to replace them with a WD 160GB IDE drive (WD1600JB-00EVA0). The system boots off of the 5GB SCSI, so I decided to make the IDE drive one huge volume (160GB, or whatever I coould get to format...) and mount it as /data0.

Hardware installation is just fine. BIOS recognizes it just fine. DiskDrake recognizes it just fine (in command line or in XTerm) (I'm running the KDE XWin desktop).

I format it for 152,625 MB, which is the largest DiskDrake will let me go, FSType is ext3 (type 83), mount point is /data0, I *do not* format it, click on the OK button, have it write to the fstab file, then exit DiskDrake and KDE desktop. Reboot. do a df. df reports that /dev/hda1 is only 7.1M big! I go back into DiskDrake to see what's going on, it says that /data0 in /dev/hda1 is formatted, mounted, and everything is peachy-keen. HUH?

Any ideas?

Steve Egan
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
igor
post Mar 10 2004, 11:50 PM
Post #2


Whats this Lie-nix Thing?
*

Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 10-March 04
Member No.: 2,556



I'm beginning to think I should stick to an abacus (see last week's strip in User Friendly)...
{yes, I'm as old as Sid *and* I've done the same stuff as he did...}

Been there, done all that. I thought that the GUI might have been screwed up, even though the GUI version of DiskDrake is actually calling /usr/sbin/diskdrake...

I even went so far as to boot the system with the LinuxCare 2.0 toolbox and using _that_ to format the disk after I tried formatting it from the command line - with the very same results. I'm beginning to suspect the BIOS's CHS table is crapping on the (software) drive parameters. In other words, the MoBo is just too old to support something as big as a 160 GB drive. I was hoping somebody else has encountered this problem and maybe has a workaround?? Speak up out there, y'all...

Ideas?

P.S. - I do all this as root. Is there any other login available?? ;P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th October 2017 - 10:02 AM