Bug 115492
| Summary: | partition definition errors | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Gene Czarcinski <gczarcinski> |
| Component: | anaconda | Assignee: | Jeremy Katz <katzj> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Mike McLean <mikem> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i386 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2005-08-15 15:46:52 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Gene Czarcinski
2004-02-13 00:24:26 UTC
It is interesting that there is an identical Maxtor 5T060H6 as hdb and the LBA values are correct for it. OK, I got an everything install done by speciying hda=7476,255,63 as a boot kernel parameter. After install, I ran parted /dev/hda print and it indicated errors whereas parted /dev/hdb print was OK. his leads me to believe that the problem is with parted. parted should be happier now as of the 1.6.9-2 I do not see the change. kernel-smp-2.6.5-1.322, parted-1.6.9.2
[root@chaos root]# parted /dev/hdb print
Disk geometry for /dev/hdb: 0.000-58644.140 megabytes
Disk label type: msdos
Minor Start End Type Filesystem Flags
1 0.031 5004.624 primary ext3 boot
2 5004.624 58643.525 extended
5 5004.655 9005.185 logical ext3
6 9005.216 13005.747 logical ext3
7 13005.778 23007.150 logical ext3
8 23007.182 33008.554 logical ext3
9 33008.585 53011.362 logical ext3
10 53011.393 58643.525 logical fat32
Information: Don't forget to update /etc/fstab, if necessary.
[root@chaos root]# parted /dev/hda print
Warning: Unable to align partition properly. This probably means that
another
partitioning tool generated an incorrect partition table, because it
didn't havethe correct BIOS geometry. It is safe to ignore,but
ignoring may cause
(fixable) problems with some boot loaders.
Ignore/Cancel? i
Disk geometry for /dev/hda: 0.000-58644.140 megabytes
Disk label type: msdos
Minor Start End Type Filesystem Flags
1 0.031 10001.403 primary fat32 boot, lba
2 10001.404 11962.463 primary linux-swap
3 11962.463 12942.993 primary ext3
4 12942.993 58643.525 extended
5 12943.024 22489.431 logical ext3
6 22489.462 32035.869 logical ext3
7 32035.900 41582.307 logical ext3
8 41582.338 51128.745 logical ext3
9 51128.776 58643.525 logical ext2
Information: Don't forget to update /etc/fstab, if necessary.
The drives are identical.
Oops ... things have gone from bad to worse. I just tried to do an install based on a snapshot of development from 15 April (x64_86). Aside from the fact that it bombed because of an selinux related traceback, the partitioning for hda (no windows involved) is not screwed up too (same business about unaligned partitions). hda had been OK with LBA. I can override at boot time with hda=14946,255,63 but I should not need to do this. The attached SATA drive is still bad too. Both drives were originally partitioned with FC1. hda was initially partitioned with anaconda/parted by FC1 i386 install and then partitions added with fdisk. /dev/sda was partitioned with fdisk under FC1 x86_64 and becomes hde under FC2T1/FC2T2. |