Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:29:27 +0200
From:      Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@apropo.ro>
To:        Malcolm Kay <malcolm.kay@internode.on.net>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: fdisk question (long)
Message-ID:  <20031203152927.5ebe0662.itetcu@apropo.ro>
In-Reply-To: <200312032318.04815.malcolm.kay@internode.on.net>
References:  <20031202125044.574ca489.itetcu@apropo.ro> <200312030029.14531.malcolm.kay@internode.on.net> <20031202171322.05f2854b.itetcu@apropo.ro> <200312032318.04815.malcolm.kay@internode.on.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:18:04 +1030
Malcolm Kay <malcolm.kay@internode.on.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:43, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 00:29:14 +1030
> >
> > Malcolm Kay <malcolm.kay@internode.on.net> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 21:20, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
> > > > Hope someone will have the pacince to read all this ...
> > > >

[..]

> > > Cylinder and head numbering starts at 0; sectors start at 1. A quirk
> > > of history that you need to know when using CHS.
> >
> > I don't think I understand.
> 
> Suppose you had 4 heads; these would be identified as head numbers 0, 1, 2 
> and 3.
> 
> Now suppose you have 4 sectors(per track); these would be identified as 
> sector numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4.
> 
> Do you now see the contrast referred to?

Tnx, now I get it.

> > > > Q5: Why the new parameters are different from those of sysinstall ?
> > >
> > > Possibly a change of assumed CHS geometry
> >
> > I don't understand this. As I didn't changed anything.
> >
> 
> I understand that what the system sees as the geometry can be influenced 
> by the parameters set in the MBR; but I would expect that once the MBR content 
> is fixed that the that the system will always see the same geometry for the 
> disk. Please note that this is what I understand -- not what I know to be so  
> ;)
> 
> I find it surprising that an MBR generated by sysinstall would exhibit this 
> head inconsistency. I've certainly not observed this here.

Well, I can assure is was made by sysinstall.
 
> On this machine I have one 60G and two 20G IDE drives all configured by 
> sysinstall. Fdisk reports geometry nnnnn/255/63 on two of the drives(the 60G
> and one of the 20G) and nnnnn/16/63 on the other. 

Interesting.

> But in each case the head 
> numbers in the slice/partition table are consistent with the reported 
> geometry.

[..]
 
> > > > Q6: Is this schema OK and will I be able to use this disk in an
> > > > other computer and access all the partitions and slices ?
> > >
> > > Probably but I would feel happier with sysinstall generated values.
> >
> > The reason I've posted this is that I've lost about 50G of date after an
> > MB crash as on the new MB I've got fsck -> CAN NOT FIND SUPERBLOCK for
> > other slices that / and I don't end-up to repeat that again (and it was
> > done with sysinstall).
> >
> 
> MB?

Moterboard. the firts was with an VIA8235 south-bridge, the second had
an 8237 and everything was OK, after I've changed this one with another
also with an 8237 the problem showed its had.

> A corrupt or improper BSD disklabel, or trying to access a ufs2 file system 
> (FBSD 5.x) as ufs sounds more likely than fdisk problems.

5.1R so UFS2; and it was shut-down properly between changing the motherbords.
 
> But make sure your slices (under fdisk) don't overlap.

Thanks.

-- 
IOnut
Unregistered ;) FreeBSD user



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031203152927.5ebe0662.itetcu>