[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: parted: problem with BR on /dev/hda3
From: |
Andrew Clausen |
Subject: |
Re: parted: problem with BR on /dev/hda3 |
Date: |
Sun, 26 Nov 2000 17:38:22 +1100 |
address@hidden wrote:
>
> sorry, it is me again.
> I tried all your hints, but all without success:
>
> My problem was/is:
> I want to copy a FAT partition which is in /dev/hda1
> but all partition tools have a problem with /dev/hda3.
> --> parted refuses to do any operation with /dev/hda.
> ( my last mail with the complete description is at the end )
> [but: I work since 2 years without any problems on this partition.]
>
> Your hints were:
>
> 1) # parted /dev/hda1 cp /dev/hde 2
> results in the following error
This is incorrect syntax for CP. Even if you don't use the partition
table, Parted has a "fake" partition table. Do:
# parted /dev/hda1 print
To see what I mean ;-)
So, you want:
# parted /dev/hda1 cp 1 /dev/hde 2
> 2) using gpart
> a) gpart -E -c -W /dev/hda -l present_hda.log dev/hda
> gives me correctly:
> |------------------------------------------------------------
> |Primary partition(3)
> | type: 131(0x83)(Linux ext2 filesystem)
> | size: 960mb #s(1967616) s(2265984-4233599)
> | chs: (281/0/1)-(524/127/63)d (281/0/1)-(524/127/63)r
> ^ ^
> |------------------------------------------------------------
> (the above command should also install this correct guess at /dev/hda)
>
> but when I save afterwards the partition table again to file
> and run "gpart -vdg file"
> I get again 523. ( also with fdisk x p )
>
> I have still an old backup which I saved when I installed Lilo
> the first time. (/boot/boot.0300).
> gpart -vdg /boot/boot.0300 gives me correctly 524.
> I also installed this MBR again using
> dd if=/boot/boot.0300 of=/dev/hda bs=446 count=1
> but fdisk x p gave again 523.
>
> History:
> I had originally lilo installed in /dev/hda and changed this a few
> month ago to /dev/hda3.
> (installing the original /boot/boot.0300 again)
>
> Is it possible that these missleading numbers are caused by
> my lilo installation ?
I doubt it.
> Eg: # parted /dev/hda1 cp /dev/hde 2
Oops. I missed out the "1".
Andrew Clausen