<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: Marko Vojinovic <<a href="mailto:vvmarko@gmail.com">vvmarko@gmail.com</a>><br>To: <a href="mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org">users@lists.fedoraproject.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 04:35:36 +0100<br>Subject: Re: Can one now help?<br>On Sunday, July 18, 2010 23:35:34 Parshwa Murdia wrote:<br>
<br>
Ok, as an aftermath, for educational purposes :-) :<br>
<br>
* The partition /dev/sda1 is what corresponds to the C: partition on Windows.<br>
It is the so-called "primary" partition, and only 4 of those can exist on the<br>
disk. They are named /dev/sda1 through /dev/sda4 in Linux.<br>
* You don't have any more primary partitions, and /dev/sda2 is instead a so-<br>
called "extended" partition, which is actually only a "container label" for<br>
all other partitions that follow, which are not primary.<br>
* The first partition contained inside the extended one is /dev/sda5 (if the<br>
number were less than 5 it would correspond to a primary partition, and could<br>
not be inside the extended one). This one is probably the Windows D:<br>
partition.<br>
* As above, /dev/sda6 and /dev/sda7 are also members of the extended<br>
partition, and correspond to your Windows drives E: and F:. Now, somewhere in<br>
between those letters Windows might stick the CD/DVD drives and assign its<br>
letters differently. The CD/DVD drives are *not* listed by the above fdisk<br>
command, and I can only guess how Windows will order its drive letters.<br>
* The /dev/sda8 partition is also a member of the extended one, and most<br>
probably the Fedora /boot partition, where the kernel and grub files reside.<br>
Windows does not show a letter for that one, since it doesn't recognize Linux<br>
partitions in general.<br>
* Finally, the /dev/sda9 partition is again not a real partition, but again a<br>
container like /dev/sda2 (although of quite different type). It is contained<br>
inside /dev/sda2, and it contains yet more partitions. This container is of<br>
LVM type, and contains all other Linux partitions (probably root and swap)<br>
inside. These partitions are not listed by fstab.<br>
<br>
I know it sounds complicated. And believe me, it is. That is what you get when<br>
you mix very old standards (only four partitions allowed on the disk) with<br>
patched technologies and new hyped ideas --- you get one primary partition,<br>
and several of them inside LVM which is inside the extended partition which is<br>
a bogus primary one.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div><br>Really complicated, I would have to see much and try to understand its basics.<br><br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Don't ask me how did disk partitioning evolve into such a stupid state. When<br>
IDE disks were being standardized (long time ago), nobody dreamed that one day<br>
you might wish to have more than 4 partitions on the disk, dual boot system<br>
and wish to be able to resize partitions on a live disk. So they invented a<br>
stupid and shortsighted standard which had to be patched after it became<br>
*obviously* shortsighted...<br>
<br>
Of course, as you already found out yourself, mounting partitions inside the<br>
LVM container is not the same as trying to mount the LVM container itself (the<br>
latter is bound to fail, since it is just a container, not an actual<br>
partition...). Hence the errors.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div><br>Yes.<br> <br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Although I am confused about sda8, it is type 83 (ext2/3/4), that one *should*<br>
have worked. But nevermind now... ;-)<br></blockquote><div> </div><div><br>Oh I see.<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
And of course, I missed to remember that you probably have a LVM container by<br>
default, so my original instructions didn't work as I thought they should. My<br>
bad. But you found out what is the proper procedure for that case via google.<br>
:-)<br></blockquote><div><br><br>No probs, it happens in technology. Frankly speaking, I am a novice and a beginner, I just listen to music on Fedora and check my mails but for security reasons, and as it is better than Windows, I am using it. To learn it, it would take much much time for me at least.<br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Well, the fstab file is a file that contains rows and columns. Specifically, each<br>
row must contain 6 columns. Column entries are separated with a space. So for<br>
example, the line<br>
<br>
tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults 0 0<br>
<br>
has "tmpfs" in the first column, "/tmp" in the second, "tmpfs" in the third,<br>
"defaults" in the fourth, and "0" in fifth and sixth. And that is ok.<br>
<br>
Now, if you look at one of the lines you modified initially, for example:<br>
<br>
/dev/mapper/VolGroup-lv_root / ext4 defaults, noatime, nodiratime 1 1<br>
<br>
I am counting 7 spaces total, which means that line has 8 columns, which the<br>
computer does not tolerate. The "defaults,", "noatime," and "nodiratime" are<br>
distributed into three columns, when they should all be in only one (4-th<br>
column). When you introduced extra spaces, you introduced extra columns, which<br>
is wrong. The right line should be<br>
<br>
/dev/mapper/VolGroup-lv_root / ext4 defaults,noatime,nodiratime 1 1<br>
<br>
Now there are no extra columns, you have 5 spaces delimiting 6 columns total,<br>
and the data in the 4-th column is "defaults,noatime,nodiratime", as it should<br>
be. The computer knows how to interpret and understand this.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div><br>Too much depth, I earlier ran the commands thinking it would simply increase the bandwidth, but running with even a single mistake is really troublesome.<br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
If you want to read more about the structure and syntax of the fstab file, type<br>
"man fstab" in the terminal, and read on.<br>
<br>
The "man" command stands for "manual", and gives you usage instructions for<br>
whatever command you wish to know about. Try "man mount", "man ls", "man cd",<br>
"man vgscan", and so on. Try even "man man", there is a manual about using the<br>
manual. :-)<br>
<br>
If you want to be able to use Linux with greater power, you need to be<br>
skillful in using the terminal. Reading manual pages is the first place to<br>
start learning. If you are very determined to learn, read "man bash".<br>
<br>
If you are a masochist, read "man bash" twice. ;-)<br>
<br>
Precisely. After the explanation above, it should be clear what was wrong and<br>
why it is now correct.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div><br>Yes.<br><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: JD <<a href="mailto:jd1008@gmail.com">jd1008@gmail.com</a>><br>To: <a href="mailto:vmarko@ipb.ac.rs">vmarko@ipb.ac.rs</a>, Community support for Fedora users <<a href="mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org">users@lists.fedoraproject.org</a>><br>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 20:48:25 -0700<br>Subject: Re: Can one now help? </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
I wonder why the fedora installer did not create a gpt partitioned disk, instead of old dos partitioning scheme.<br></blockquote><div><br><br>If they might have done this, we could have asked "why the fedora installer did not create a old dos partitioning scheme, instead of a gpt partitioned disk." Every part has its own problems.<br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: Marko Vojinovic <<a href="mailto:vvmarko@gmail.com">vvmarko@gmail.com</a>><br>To: <a href="mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org">users@lists.fedoraproject.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 04:50:15 +0100<br>Subject: Re: Can one now help?<br>On Sunday, July 18, 2010 22:56:35 Christofer C. Bell wrote:<br>
<br>
And this is *precisely* why I hate LVM being the default. While a newbie<br>
typically has trouble to understand even the above output, and is completely<br>
lost with the added layer of complexity of LVM, when something stupid goes<br>
wrong it can easily become rocket science to mount and fix something inside </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">LVM.<br>
</blockquote><div><br><br>For beginners, its really troublesome.<br> <br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
And the benefit of LVM for a newbie is next to nothing, they are hardly even<br>
aware what LVM is and how it can be used, let alone manipulate it from a<br>
rescue environment.<br>
<br>
I know LVM is useful if one needs its functionality, but it is a complete<br>
overkill as a default installation choice, IMNSHO. People who know they need<br>
it typically know how to choose it during installation. People who don't know<br>
about it typically don't need it. Why it is chosen by default is beyond me.<br></blockquote><div><br><br>Everytime, something new they try to do, so they implemented it with LVM, I hope this may be reason.</div></div>
<br>