[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Not really a bug...
From: |
thomas . friedrichsmeier |
Subject: |
Re: Not really a bug... |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:01:55 +0100 |
Sorry I didn't get around to answering earlier.
> > > Could you give me the output of cat /proc/mounts? thanks.
> >
> > /dev/root / reiserfs rw 0 0
> > proc /proc proc rw 0 0
> > devpts /dev/pts devpts rw 0 0
> > /dev/hda2 /windows/C vfat rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev 0 0
> > shmfs /dev/shm shm rw 0 0
> > /proc/bus/usb /proc/bus/usb usbdevfs rw 0 0
Note, that I really don't know, whether /windows/C was mounted,
so / might well have been the only mounted filesystem on the
harddrive.
> Can you reproduce the problem? Or does reproducing it involve
> destroying stuff?
Well, it would involve messing with filesytems I use and need. Of
course it's half as bad, since I can write down the exact partition
data before attempting to reproduce the problem, but I'll wait to
see, whether the problem is with the real-root-dev-stuff.
> Perhaps it's not dealing with /dev/root properly. Notice in your
> about /proc/mounts output, there is /dev/root? Well, Parted looks in
> /proc/sys/kernel/real-root-dev to find the root device. Maybe it's
> broken in 2.4. Could you send the output of:
>
> # cat /proc/sys/kernel/real-root-dev
It says
773
which doesn't mean much to me...
> > > I'm working on operation queue stuff ATM, so it will work by
> > > [do all operations], then you type commit, where it will display a
> > > scary message. I think this is better in the long run.
> >
> > Does sound like a clean solution. Also it conforms to the style of
> > the other fdisk tools I know.
>
> Yeah, it sounds nice, but it's a PITA to implement.
I can imagine. I'd offer you some help, too, but I really don't know
anything about partition-tables, filesystems and the like. You'll be
my hero, though.
Thomas Friedrichsmeier