Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 00:43:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert N Watson <rnw+@andrew.cmu.edu> To: freebsd-questions@freefall.FreeBSD.org Subject: disklabel/fdisk and wd1 -- help please! Message-ID: <skSTbLa00YUqR6oUpj@andrew.cmu.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This afternoon I installed an older 540 meg IDE drive I had lying around
in my pentium 120 system (it had been a freebsd boot disk for my 386
system, but I wanted to up my server capacity a bit, so.. :) The drive
works fine -- it's been running for a few years on the 386, and running
freebsd at that. It has some oddities -- one is that it's about the
1024 cylinder limit, but that should pose no problem on a realistic
operating system? That's what I thought ;). Here's my disk config order
-- if anyone could point out where I made my error, I'd appreciate it a
lot. I feel pretty silly -- I installed an 85 meg IDE hd in the same
system yesterday ;) (I swapped that out into the 386 to make up for the
loss of the 540 ;). Yes, it's configured as a slave, etc.
step 1 - fdisk:
fledge>fdisk -iu wd1
******* Working on device wd1 *******
parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are:
cylinders=1060 heads=16 sectors/track=63 (1008 blks/cyl)
Figures below won't work with BIOS for partitions not in cyl 1
parameters to be used for BIOS calculations are:
cylinders=1060 heads=16 sectors/track=63 (1008 blks/cyl)
Do you want to change our idea of what BIOS thinks ? [n]
Warning: BIOS sector numbering starts with sector 1
Information from DOS bootblock is:
The data for partition 0 is:
sysid 165,(FreeBSD/NetBSD/386BSD)
start 0, size 1032192 (504 Meg), flag 0
beg: cyl 0/ sector 1/ head 0;
end: cyl 1023/ sector 63/ head 15
Do you want to change it? [n]
The data for partition 1 is:
<UNUSED>
Do you want to change it? [n]
The data for partition 2 is:
<UNUSED>
Do you want to change it? [n]
The data for partition 3 is:
<UNUSED>
Do you want to change it? [n]
Do you want to change the active partition? [n]
We haven't changed the partition table yet. This is your last chance.
parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are:
cylinders=1060 heads=16 sectors/track=63 (1008 blks/cyl)
Figures below won't work with BIOS for partitions not in cyl 1
parameters to be used for BIOS calculations are:
cylinders=1060 heads=16 sectors/track=63 (1008 blks/cyl)
Information from DOS bootblock is:
0: sysid 165,(FreeBSD/NetBSD/386BSD)
start 0, size 1032192 (504 Meg), flag 0
beg: cyl 0/ sector 1/ head 0;
end: cyl 1023/ sector 63/ head 15
1: <UNUSED>
2: <UNUSED>
3: <UNUSED>
Should we write new partition table? [n] y
ioctl DIOCWLABEL: Operation not supported by device
fledge>
OK, so far so good. I was a bit worried about the cylinder counts,
because when i tried to use the entire disk, it wrapped the end cylinder
at 1024 when reporting on how I had set up the disk at the end. I
aborted and tried again with values in the appropriate range. I think
my math is right on siozes, etc, but again, any help proferred will be
happily accepted ;).
Step 2: disklabel (the easy part, I though ;):
fledge>disklabel -e -r wd1
Bad pack magic number (label is damaged, or pack is unlabeled)
fledge>
That doesn't look to good... The console reported this:
Oct 10 00:29:50 fledge /kernel: wd1: cannot find label (no disk label)
Actually, followed by this from some further attempts:
Oct 10 00:30:24 fledge last message repeated 4 times
Oct 10 00:31:46 fledge last message repeated 2 times
I've tried rebooting at various stages in the process to check that the
core image was written out, etc. At one point it complained when
scanning the system for drives (wdc0) that it couldn't find a disk
label, but on the whole it just went straight on and nothing went wrong
until I tried to disklabel (once or twice fdisk had to be run on the wd0
drive to update the wd1 data, I found. Rather strange.) It is hard to
write a label out (especially a from-scratch label) when disklabel
doesn't work. What we really need is a sysinstall it's safe to play
with after installation ;). all this is so nicely autmoated in
sysinstall, but once the system is up, we're left with doing it all by
hand again. I question the wisdom of that particular arrangement?
Anyhow, thanks for any help; I wouldn't mind if it were sooner rather
than later, all things considering ;) also, sorry if the first part of
the message got posted wihtout the rest -- the paste and send mouse
combinations are scarily similar here ;)
----
Robert Watson (rnw+@andrew.cmu.edu) * Double major: IDS/CS * H&SS
http://www.watson.org/ robert@fledge.watson.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?skSTbLa00YUqR6oUpj>