[Re: Mounting troubles]

Sean picasso@madflower.com
Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:22:03 -0400 (EDT)


Not to be completely stupid but What are the results of a 'df'? My first
would be that it is already mounted elsewhere on the filesystem by
default from the install.



On 21 Sep 2001, Matt Graham wrote:

> "Daniel R . Kilbourne" <drk@voyager.net> wrote:
>
> > hda1 is my Windows partition, hda2 is /, and hda3 is the extended
> > partition (not sure why it's labeled Win95) that contains the rest of my
> > linux partitions. The problem is that I want to mount hda4 as a shared
> > data partition. MOUNT says "wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on
> > /dev/hda4, or too many mounted file systems." I don't understand this -
> > the file system is fine as win98 mounts it with no problems. If you can
> > think of anything I can do to make this work, PLEASE let me know.
>
>
> >    Device Boot    Start       End    Blocks   Id  System
> > /dev/hda1   *         1      2434  19551073+   c  Win95 FAT32 (LBA)
> > /dev/hda2          2435      2473    313267+  83  Linux
> > /dev/hda3          2474      3571   8819685    f  Win95 Ext'd (LBA)
> > /dev/hda4          3572      4865  10394055    c  Win95 FAT32 (LBA)
> [snip]
>
> This is strange.  In many cases, when you have 2 primary FAT partitions under
> Win9x, things will not work correctly on the Windows side.  Your Linux/BSD
> partitions will show up as "phantom drives", data can be written to the wrong
> area of a drive, and hideous filesystem corruption can occur. Partition tables
> generated with FDISK.EXE will create partitions beyond the first one as
> logical partitions instead of primary ones (unless you push FDISK, of
> course.)
>
> The command "mount -v -t vfat /dev/hda4 /mnt/somewhere" executed as root
> followed by a "dmesg | tail -30" may produce more useful information.  It
> could be that Linux and 'Doze are disagreeing on where the actual start of
> /dev/hda4 is, and the beginning of the FAT filesystem is not where Linux is
> expecting it to be.
>
> BTW, it is not wise to mount a non-native filesystem as /home even if this is
> a single-user system, and it's *TOTALLY* unsuitable for a multi-user system.
> FAT lacks support for file permissions, symlinks, and special files.  If
> something like X or xmms wants to create a socket in ~, it will fail miserably
> and cause you pain.  FAT's handling of files like .bashrc could also cause
> problems.  Mount /dev/hda4 somewhere else with the option umask=000 if you're
> not worried about security, and if you must, make a symlink from your ~ to the
> place where it's mounted.
>
>
>