SCOUG-HELP Mailing List Archives

<< Previous Message << >> Next Message >>

Date:	Tue, 30 Sep 2003 12:23:37 PDT7
From:	"lists 2 svobi at synass dot net" <lists2svobi@synass.net >
Reply-To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
Subject:	SCOUG-Help: Re: Questions (probably already asked and answered

Content Type: text/plain

=====================================================
If you are responding to someone asking for help who
may not be a member of this list, be sure to use the
REPLY TO ALL feature of your email program.
=====================================================

Hi Jordan
I do have another focus than you wrote below here !
It is a very important decsision to change from FDISK to LVM !!
One has to understand fully the consequences of this elementary change
!!!

It is absolutely elementary that with LVM replacing FDISK makes FDISK =

poisant for the LVM environment !!

Hands OFF from Partition Magic too: It's not supporting LVM and =

therefor not adequate in this LVM environment too !

All my systems are NON-LVM however LVM does have a lot of benefits ;-)
Some question marks with LVM made me hesitating to use it straight-away.

Another question mark appears on the use of JFS !
IFS needs LVM and with these 2 new topics I have TWO insecurities in my =

personal experience !!
This is one more reason to re-consider and re-think the use of LVM and
JFS !!!

I do not want to loose my data because I am in-experienced or un-able
to =

handle all this stuff with competence ;-|

If ONE does use FDISK or Partition Magic (or whatever not compatible to =

LVM and / or JFS then no wonder: It's ONES OWN fault or incompetence
;-((

Last but not least:
I do not want to sound offending or rude with my opinion and I do hope =

you'll accept my comment as a concern to data security ;-)

Cheers, svobi
=

jr_fox@pacbell.net on 30.09.2003 20:18:30
Please respond to scoug-help@scoug.com
To: scoug-help@scoug.com
cc: =

Subject: SCOUG-Help: Re: Questions (probably already asked and answered

Martin wrote:

> >(1) How do you fix an LVM partitioned hardddrive that LVM reports as
> >having incorrect partitioning data on it? I can access the volumes,
but
> >cannot remove Boot Manager and probably cannot change any of its
> >partioning.

I can't agree with Steven that Google is necessarily your friend: often
it is, but
not so rarely it ain't. What used to be the Deja Power Search template
(for the
newsgroups) is quite good, though I guess that's part of Google now. =

In this
case, there happens to be a considerable amount of material on the
subject.
In fact, it was way more than I cared to read online, so I downloaded a
lot of
it, probably to print out.

In what I did read, there seemed to be a consensus that the LVM
partition info
was easily damaged -- by a lot of things -- in particular running
non-LVM-aware
utilities like Partition Magic. The remedy, recoounted over and over,
was to run
LVM again, and let it put its stamp on all the partitions again. That
may be an
oversimplification, but that was the gist of it.

If things are *still* screwed up, there are probably things a
knowledgeable person
could do with DFSEE. (It would have been a really good idea to have
DFSEE
take "snapshots" of all your partition info, *before* you began any
risky operations.)
Tony Butka wrote a basic tutorial / article on DFSEE, which you can
find on the
SCOUG website. I've been meaning to study it ever since it was
published, and
hope I don't put that off until the wolf is at the door, so to speak.

> WinMe is a pain in the arse: it insists
> on formatting the entire 120 GB drive as C: unless I partition it
first.

Win-ME is widely regarded as the WORST version of Win since Win95.

> I made a FAT32 partition with FDISK. I will just install WinMe in a
> FAT16 2GB partition and see if it works.

FDISK is also an LVM partition-data killer.

The general rule of thumb, which is echoed in the eCS guide, is that the
Win boot partitions should go in first. Among those, any earlier
versions
should precede the later ones. Once those are squared away, the eCS
boot
partition(s) should go on last. (Or Warp, if you're prepared to deal
with
much more difficult install issues and hardware / driver stuff, on
current
systems.)

That is more or less the point I'm stuck at, on this sff box. The W2Ks
seemed
to be working fine . . . except that I couldn't get the boot loader to
work in
the _alternate_ C:, where I tried out DR-DOS 7.03 for it's superior
features,
and decided I preferred it to the PC-DOS 2000 I've had on my desktop
system
for several years. Hopefully, eCS goes on real soon now, if I can just
figure
out a couple of basic hardware things that have been annoying mysteries.

Jordan

************************************************
>>> Say NO to H T M L in Mail and News <<<
>>> AGAINST TERROR +++ AGAINST WAR <<<
************************************************=

=====================================================

To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-help".

For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".

=====================================================

Return to [ 30 | September | 2003 ]

SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group. OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.