Hi again Greg
Gregory Avedissian wrote:
Thanks, Charles. I was afraid that hdb designation
would be confusing.
That's just temporary, so I can do things to that drive from a working
linux intall on another disk. I've got three drives within reach of the
IDE cables, and I keep switching cables and jumpers to do all this.
Now why did you not let us know that right from the start!?
In particular, your second post had lines like
dd if=/dev/hda of=/boot/boot.MBR bs=512 count=1
dd if=/dev/hda of=/boot/boot.446.MBR bs=446 count=1
I restored with:
dd if=/boot/boot.MBR of=/dev/hda bs=512 count=1
all of which referred to /dev/hda! It is hard to tell without
mind-reading exactly what you did. Do you see why you *must* tell us
*exactly* what you did/are doing. There is no way we can guess that you
moved the drive from /dev/hda to /dev/hdb (and god-knows-what-else!).
In turn, if we are assuming the /dev/hda you reported is correct, we
stand a good chance of telling you to do something which could be a
disaster if it is mounted as /dev/hdb.
Now I hope you can see why I kept harping on telling us *what* you did
rather than what you *think* you did.
The disk in question is around 30GB, and originally, 6
GB were taken by
windows on hda1, 1GB by swap on hda2, 8GB for hda3, and 10GB for hda5,
leaving 3.7GB unallocated space in the extended partition. I did this by
making the win partition with the win98 fdisk, and then making the linux
partitions with the suse intall disk. It looks like the numbers aren't
adding up right.
>> Disk /dev/hdb: 1123 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track
> That equals 18040995 sectors of 512 bytes/each = 9,236,989,440 bytes
Yes! You claim it is a 30 gig disk and, as Chuck points out, it is
coming out about 9. Note that this is even before you get into the
details of partitions. At this point I have not the slightest idea of
where we are, especially since you have been swapping drives in
god-knows-what order and fdisk /mbr on again an unknown (to us) drive.
The Win95 partition is just about the entire disk, leaving only 31.5
1024-byte blocks left = 32,256 bytes. Where could any Linux
partitions have fit?
On the other 24GB which appear not to be partitioned.
See comments above, the summary for /dev/hdb *total* says there are not
another 24 GB!
I'm a little
bothered by the math, though. You came up with 9GB, and I made that
You *think* you did. It would appear the fact is that you really do not
know what you did!
>> OK, one more idea. Can I use the partition
tool to set the partitions
>> again without formatting them, and then be able to access them?
> If you are absolutely sure of the correct start/end of all the
> partitions on the disk, then yes, you should be able to re-set them in
> the partition table and regain access to the data without formatting
> them. This is much more likely to happen if there are no extended
> partitions (hdb5 or higher).
Chuck, you are more optimistic than I! :-) I think that right now we
are flying blind. Also, he now refers to a /dev/hd5 and and extended
partition, so the cards would appear to be stacked even more solidly
No, I'm not sure, just assuming that if I use the same partition tool
with the same drive, it'll come up with the same numbers. Guess I need
to double-check the size of my win partition and make sure it hasn't
changed. In fact, I seem to recall noticing that hda1 ended well below
cyl 1023 when I set it up. At 8225280 bytes/cylinder, 6GB should end at
cyl 750, not 1125. The partition tool shows the end of hda1 at 1023, and
the end of hda2 at 1154. Uh-oh.
Now, once again, that comes out of the blue (unless I lost something in
all this long exchange). You just give the numbers in your edited
version rather than tell us *exactly* what you did and then show us
*exactly* what came out.
I better sleep on it before I do anything else.
As I indicated earlier, prayer might be more effective!
Maybe parted didn't work because I gave it the
That "it' says a lot! Yes, wrong numbers is one of a zillion (and