Search Results

Search found 11478 results on 460 pages for 'disk partition'.

Page 43/460 | < Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >

• Split a partition with GParted

  - by Eray

  These are my current disk partitions. /yedek is for some personal backup files. As you can see there is only Ubuntu on my PC. I will install Windows, too. Because of this I want to shrink /dev/sda3 . It currently 546GB and I want to split it: 300GB for / and 246GB for Windows (NTFS) is OK for me. I'm using GParted for the first time. How can I shrink /? I don't want to lose any datas from Ubuntu.

  Read the article

• Preseed Ubuntu installation with full disk encryption

  - by user249264

  I am trying to set up Ubuntu full disk encryption using preseeding. I was able to set things up correctly following the preseed file presented here. But I do not want to provide the default password in the preseed file. Is there a way to let ubiquity fall to the screen that asks for the encryption passphrase just like it does when the username is not provided in the preseed file? When I try to leave the passphrase option empty in the preseed file, I get an error in the installer saying "An error occured while creating the keyfile".

  Read the article

• How can I implement full disk encryption for a disk containing Ubuntu with plausible deniability?

  - by Rupert

  I would like to have a disk that: has Ubuntu installed is fully encrypted is setup in such a way as to make denial of the existence of the Ubuntu install plausible Truecrypt provides the last two features but only for Windows: http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/?s=sys-encryption-supported-os The alternate installer for Ubuntu provides the first two features but not the last. I imagine that plausible deniability would be achieved by, at least: Having two installs of Ubuntu and 2 passphrases (or keyfiles) which would unencrypt each one. Moving any unencrypted data (such as /boot) onto a USB stick Are there any programs out there which support this feature set for Ubuntu?

  Read the article

• 3TB non-boot hard disk on older motherboard

  - by Bcos

  It is time to expand the capacity of my Ubuntu home file server so I would like to purchase some 3TB hard disks. However, I am concerned with potential compatibility issues. I've tried searching around but I haven't found information which clearly addresses my particular situation. My server is running Ubuntu 10.04 on an Intel P35 chipset based system. The motherboard does not support UEFI (and, by extension, GPT?). However, Ubuntu does support 2TB disks. Will I be able to properly utilize these new disks, or does the motherboard limitation trump all else? The boot disk is <2TB and will not be updated nor am I dual-booting; these disks will be used strictly as slaves in a pure Ubuntu environment. I'd hate to pull the trigger on these new disks just to be unpleasantly surprised, so any feedback is appreciated. Thanks!

  Read the article

• How do I align my partition table properly?

  - by Jorge Castro

  I am in the process of building my first RAID5 array. I've used mdadm to create the following set up: root@bondigas:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Wed Oct 20 20:00:41 2010 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 5860543488 (5589.05 GiB 6001.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 1953514496 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Wed Oct 20 20:13:48 2010 State : clean, degraded, recovering Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Rebuild Status : 1% complete UUID : f6dc829e:aa29b476:edd1ef19:85032322 (local to host bondigas) Events : 0.12 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 16 0 active sync /dev/sdb 1 8 32 1 active sync /dev/sdc 2 8 48 2 active sync /dev/sdd 4 8 64 3 spare rebuilding /dev/sde While that's going I decided to format the beast with the following command: root@bondigas:~# mkfs.ext4 /dev/md1p1 mke2fs 1.41.11 (14-Mar-2010) /dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes. This may result in very poor performance, (re)-partitioning suggested. Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) Stride=16 blocks, Stripe width=48 blocks 97853440 inodes, 391394047 blocks 19569702 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 Maximum filesystem blocks=0 11945 block groups 32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group 8192 inodes per group Superblock backups stored on blocks: 32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208, 4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872, 71663616, 78675968, 102400000, 214990848 Writing inode tables: ^C 27/11945 root@bondigas:~# ^C I am unsure what to do about "/dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes." and how to properly partition the disks to match so I can format it properly.

  Read the article

• How do I align my partition table properly?

  - by Jorge Castro

  I am in the process of building my first RAID5 array. I've used mdadm to create the following set up: root@bondigas:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Wed Oct 20 20:00:41 2010 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 5860543488 (5589.05 GiB 6001.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 1953514496 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Wed Oct 20 20:13:48 2010 State : clean, degraded, recovering Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Rebuild Status : 1% complete UUID : f6dc829e:aa29b476:edd1ef19:85032322 (local to host bondigas) Events : 0.12 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 16 0 active sync /dev/sdb 1 8 32 1 active sync /dev/sdc 2 8 48 2 active sync /dev/sdd 4 8 64 3 spare rebuilding /dev/sde While that's going I decided to format the beast with the following command: root@bondigas:~# mkfs.ext4 /dev/md1p1 mke2fs 1.41.11 (14-Mar-2010) /dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes. This may result in very poor performance, (re)-partitioning suggested. Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) Stride=16 blocks, Stripe width=48 blocks 97853440 inodes, 391394047 blocks 19569702 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 Maximum filesystem blocks=0 11945 block groups 32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group 8192 inodes per group Superblock backups stored on blocks: 32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208, 4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872, 71663616, 78675968, 102400000, 214990848 Writing inode tables: ^C 27/11945 root@bondigas:~# ^C I am unsure what to do about "/dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes." and how to properly partition the disks to match so I can format it properly.

  Read the article

• Help in decide the partition to install ubuntu

  - by G.Ashwin kumar

  I have a PC running with windows 7 ultimate 64 bit version with 4 gig Ram. I have a 320 gig hard disk , in which I have allocated 120 gig for windows 7, 100 gig for NY files(named ashwin in windows) and rest 80-90 gig partitioned but empty NTFS partition.Now where do I install Ubuntu so that windows and data is safe. I got the option install with windows I selected it , it then shows select drive(SCSI1 (0,0,0) (sda) -320.1 GB ATA WDC WD3200AAJS-6) and allocate driver by dragging the divider below which shows 66.5gb and 59.3 GB respectively. Which one do I go with? I clicked advance partitioning it shows five devices: device , type, m.point ,size.(mb), used(mb)......... /dev/sda1, NTFS, 104 , 35 (windows 7 loader) /dev/sda2, NTFS, 104752, 23604 /dev/sda3, NTFS, 125829, 10161 /dev/sda5, NTFS, 89382, 3221 when I checked size in properties it showed name of drive according to windows, used.Gb, free, total. ashwin, 10.2, 115.7, 125.8 c drive, 23.6, 81.1, 104.8 new volume, 92.6mb, 89.3, 89.4 except mentioned everything in gigabytes.ignore the last dots. I want to install it in new volume or using that space how do I do it? Explain in detail I'm a beginner.

  Read the article

• Fresh install on SSD with Ubuntu and Windows Vista, using whole disk encryption for Ubuntu

  - by nategator

  I would like to do a fresh install on a OCZ Vertex Plus R2 SSD 60GB drive I purchased on the cheap. Since the AES-encryption looks like it may not work optimally for this drive, I would like to set up a dual-boot to Windows Vista (the only Windows copy I have for clean install purposes) and Ubuntu 12.04 with the best encryption scheme possible. My plan is to have Windows around just in case I need to use a program that won't work with Wine and Ubuntu as my daily OS with all of my information secured in case the laptop is ever stolen or sold. Although this setup will not provide a lot of space, I think I can squeeze both OSes and have enough for second-computer office tasks. So, my questions are: Which OS should I install first, Ubuntu or Vista? Any special considerations when partitioning the drive? How should I install Ubuntu to ensure full disk encryption for the Linux partition(s) and or my daily computing? Is there a significant performance upgrade with doing a solo install of Ubuntu instead of a dual boot setup? Will TRIM, for example, work correctly? Are there any significant security concerns with going the route of a dual-boot, other than the fact that any activity on Windows may be fully recoverable if the drive is stolen or sold? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Run Win7 Guest (raw disk) in Ubuntu (which was installed as Dual Boot on existing Win7)

  - by kingdango

  I installed Ubuntu 12.10 on top of Win 7 as a dual boot (awesome!). I'm hoping to use VirtualBox to run my original Win7 instance as a guest OS under Ubuntu. I found this existing question and followed the directions to no avail. I can get the VMDK file created but when I run it I just get a blank black screen with no additional information and Windows never loads. I see no HD activity or anything that would indicate it's loading. I used this command to create the VMDK file: VBoxManager internalcommands createrawvmdk -filename ~/.VirtualBox/Win7Native.vmdk -rawdisk /dev/sda3 It looks like everything was created correctly but I just get a blank screen when I run the VM. I do get this warning when I boot the VM: VirtualBox - Warning The virtual machine execution may run into and error condition as described below... The medium '/home/XXX/.VirtualBox/Win7Native.vmdk' has a logical size of 583GB but the file system the medium is located on can only handle up to 16GB in theory. We strongly recommend to put all your virtual disk images and the snapshot folder on a proper file system (e.g. etc3) with a sufficient size. ErrorId: Fat Partition Detected Severity: Warning How can I get this working?

  Read the article

• Trouble installing from disk

  - by SuperNatural

  I'm writing this in desperation, Windows is slowly killing me and i need to change my home pc os to Ubuntu 11.04 as soon as possible. I created a USB flash drive to install ubuntu, twice, and both times they failed to begin install on restart of my pc. i read on another forum that you might have to change some boot sequence in BIOS but when pressing F2 to enter it didnt work. After a lot of cursing, I made myself an UBUNTU install cd and booted. To my excitement, it now displayed... try ubuntu and install ubuntu. i clicked install ubuntu which lead me to the preparing to install ubuntu display, i checked download updates while installing and clicked forward. The very next display is ' allocate drive space ' i assume there are meant to be options of drives provided but mine is just a blank box and underneath all the options to create a new partition table, add, change, delete and revert are all greyed out. There is a drop down menu labelled 'device for boot loader installlation' but the only option is /dev/sda. when i click install, a no root file system error comes up telling me to please correct from the partitioning menu. I am extremely frustrated. please!! can anyone help me...

  Read the article

• How to create NTFS partition in Linux to install Windows 7 from USB?

  - by Michal Stefanow

  I messed up with my computer and need help. Generally: install Windows 7 from USB. Problem: "setup was unable to create a new system partition" When first attempt to install Windows 7 failed I tried Linux live USB, installed distro to HDD, and erased all the existing partitions. Current state (fdisk -l): [writing from other computer so no copy and paste] /dev/sda1 305GB Linux /dev/sda2 7GB Extended /dev/sda5 7GB Linux Swam / Solaris To create a new, NTFS partition: fdisk /dev/sda n (for new) p (for primary) 3 (for partintion number) "No free sectors available" All the HDD was formatted couple of minutes before so there is a lot of free space but how to resize a parition? I cannot find an option for resizing in man fdisk. Some people say I should use gparted but my distro doesn't not contain this package. And my distro doesn't support wireless drivers so I have serious problems with downloading stuff. I tried also using cfdisk but any command results in: "cfdisk bad primary partition 1 partition ends in the final partial cylinder" I tried also removing partition 1 and then creating a new one (so there is no "no free sectors"). I'm receiving a warning: "Re-reading the partition table failed with error 16: Device or resource busy. The kernel still uses the old table. The new table will be used at the next reboot." After restating: "grub rescue, no known filesystem" It may indicate that some changes have been made BUT when running Windows 7 installed some another error: "Windows cannot be installed to Disk 0 Partition 1" More detailed: "Windows cannot be installed to this hard disk space. Windows must be installed to a partition formatted as NTFS." So formatting drive using Windows 7 installer BUT this time yet another error: "Setup was unable to create a new system partition or locate an existing system partition. See the setup log files for more information" Apparently I cannot access logs (how?) and I am back to drawing board with my live USB (this time showing partition as HPFS/NTFS). Any suggestions how to install Windows 7? Should I reinstall Linux to HDD, erase existing partitions once again, and use Parted rather than gparted (parted is included in the distro). Or maybe should I create another bootable USB such as PartedMagic to painlessly create partitions? I just want to install Windows 7 from USB, my laptop is semi-operational and I am ready to receive some help regarding fdisk and creating NTFS partitions. UPDATE: I did as suggested (removed all the partitions) and tried to install in unallocated space. Tried to create a new partition and format it. Same error: "setup was unable to create a new system partition" Came to the conclusion it may have something to do with TrueCrypt I have recently installed. Right now trying to FIX MBR (as I haven't got possibility to create rescue disc without optical drive)

  Read the article

• is it a good idea to change a recovery partition from primary to logical? [HP laptop]

  - by DiegoDD

  I have a new HP laptop, model dv6-6c85la, with 1TB hard drive, and it has 4 primary partitions, like this: |<- system [199 MB] -|<- c: [899.8 GB] -|<- d:(recovery) [27.5 GB] -|<- e:(hp_tools) [4 GB] -| I wanted to make another partition, splitting "C" which is the main partition, into TWO partitions, and leave the rest as it is. but it doesn't let me because they are already 4 primary partitions (the ones in the diagram). I read somewhere, that i could in fact split C into 2 partitions, but only if the adjacent partition (in this case d:(recovery) is converted into a "logical" partition. That way, the new unallocated part taken from C, and the recovery partition, would each be logical, "inside" an extended partition (right???) As i understand, the resulting partitions would be: primary (system, no letter), primary (c:), extended [ logical (x:) | logical(d:recovery) ], primary (e: hp_tools) "x" being the new one. am i correct? My question is, if i do convert the recovery partition to logical (and thus, it is inside an extended partition adjacent to the new "x:" one), would i have any problems when in case of a disaster i would like to restore the system using the now logical instead of primary RECOVERY partition? Or it is completely safe to change it to logical? My main concern is because i think i may need to be primary so the recovery can proceed in boot time? Or i am completely wrong? how does the recovery process happens? I also understand that i can simply create recovery media, in DVDs, and then even i would be able to delete that recovery partition completely, but as of now, i don't want to do that. I may create the disks, but i don't want to delete the partition, simply because it would be a lot faster and easier to recover from a hard drive than disks. Wrapping up: if i change a recovery partition from primary to logical, will the system still be capable of using it to recover? or it NEEDS to be primary to work? The whole point is that i want to split C:, but as things are, i cant directly, i'd need to change the recovery partition to logical. Or is there another way? thanks.

  Read the article

• GParted wont resize extended partitions

  - by Magnum Frost

  I have dual booted windows 7 and Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and have decided that I need more space on my Ubuntu partition. I used gparted on a Live CD to shrink my Windows 7 partition (/dev/sda3) but when i try to resize the extended partition (/dev/sda4), which houses my linux partition (/dev/sda6), the right click options are greyed out and there is a key next to the extended partition. I have resized the partitions within the extended partition before to provide room, but now I can go no further with that, and need to grow the extended partition. The free space lies to the left of the extended partition and there is a small amount of free space directly to the right as well. Also, within the extended partition is /dev/sda5 (ntfs) , which I have no idea what is on it, but most of the space (3.42GB) is used, /dev/sda6 (ext4, mount point: /), my partition containing Linux, and /dev/sda7 (linux-swap). I hope you guys can help me with this because I really don't want to screw something up while trying to resize the extended partition.

  Read the article

• Force RAID to read "exiled" disk?

  - by user197015

  We have a RAID 6 array (Infortrend EonStor DS S16F) that recently had two disks fail. Immediately prior to replacing these two disks, a third, good, disk was accidentally ejected from the array. After reinserting this disk it is marked as "exiled" by the array's firmware, and so even after replacing the two failed disks with new ones the array refuses to rebuild the logical volume and remains inaccessible. Since the temporarily-ejected disk is still functional and nothing has been written to the array since it was ejected, it seems that it should theoretically be possible to recover all the data on the array, but how can we convince the array to use the data from the "exiled" disk? Thanks for any help or advice you can offer.

  Read the article

• Spikes of 99% disk activity in Windows 8 Task Manager

  - by Jonathan Chan

  For some reason Windows 8's Task Manager reports spikes of 99% disk activity for hours at a time. Looking at the entries in that column, however, data doesn't seem to be getting written any more quickly than when the disk activity is around 25-50% (which it seem to idle at most of the time). Furthermore, when these 99% disk activity spikes are happening, the average response time reported in the Performance tab becomes 4000-6000ms. Is there a good way to find out what is causing the disk activity? I've tried using Process Explorer, but I said above, the rate at which data is reportedly being written doesn't seem to correspond (Dropbox and Google Chrome are constantly the top two, but the spikes are not dependent on their being open). Thanks in advance for any help. It gets very annoying when the computer stutters to a halt.

  Read the article

• Time Machine (OSX) doesn't back up files in Mount Point or Disk Image File

  - by Chris

  I found this Q&A (http://superuser.com/questions/148849/backup-mounted-drive-of-an-image-in-time-machine) and this prompted me to ask the following question: I have two disk images which are scripted to be mounted on login. These two disk images are always mounted to the same location. These two disk images are encrypted TrueCrypt volumes. Time Machine (TM) will only back up the disk images the first time they are mounted, but not after that. As I modify documents within the volumes throughout the day, the modified timestamps are adjusted properly. However, TM does not back them up. TM never backs up the mount points which are two folders within my home directory. Any ideas as to why neither the mount point or the image files are backed up? Do the image files have to be closed (unmounted) after being modified for TM to back them up? Thanks, Chris

  Read the article

• Disk I/O error copying a Exchange 2007 database

  - by Scottio

  Hi all, A short time ago due to disk space I moved our Exchange database onto an external drive, the drive was new and the database was being backed up daily. I've now discovered the database is corrupt, I've run the Exchange utils to fix the database and this works but it corrupts again as soon as I try to move it. I need to get it off the disk, any suggestions? I'm also trying to restore the last good database but I'd like try to get the database off this disk, any suggestions? PS I know putting the db on an external disk was a bad move, I had no where else to put it :-( Thanks

  Read the article

• replace laptop hard disk

  - by 5YrsLaterDBA

  I have bought a ACER Aspire 5736Z-4790 laptop for my parents. It just passed the warranty. I think the hard disk is bad now. I cannot open/copy some of my files. It will crash (blue screen) when I do chkdsk /f/r in the stage 4 of 5 which is verifying file data. I can hear a strange noise when it is reading the bad sectors (I guess because it hangs there.) I am thinking replace the hard disk. should I buy the same hard disk or any SATA laptop hard disk will be ok? BTW, is there a way to repair it (with software)?

  Read the article

• Can't activate dynamic disk

  - by SuperFurryToad

  For some reason I can't activate a dynamic disk connected to my PC via a USB hard disk enclosure. It has activated previously without any problems. When I check the event logs, I get this message every time I try to activate the disk: dmio: Harddisk2 write error at block 2930277167: status 0xc0000015

  Read the article

• What is the data transfer speeds within the disk, to other devices?

  - by Kumar

  I use Debian 6 on a HP Elitbook 6930 with 2Gigs of RAM. I was copying two AVI files, 1.5 GB in total, and noticed that the data copying was done at the rate of 4MB/sec. When I copy same AVIs to my Western Digital Passport 25G USB plugin drive the data transfer speed is 11+MB/sec. This speed is different if I plugin the drive to different USB ports. Interestingly, at work I also downloaded a 16MB IE8 exe on my virtual xp, run inside Oracle Sun Virtual Box, and it was downloaded AND saved within a second. We have a high speed network at work. :-) Why and how this difference in data speeds is possible?

  Read the article

• After using lvextend, I can't recover unused space

  - by Cory Gagliardi

  I needed to add more disk space to my CentOS VM, so I added another virtual disk, then used lvextend to add the space to the existing partition. The steps I followed was: echo "- - -" > /sys/class/scsi_host/host0/scan pvcreate /dev/sdb vgextend VolGroup00 /dev/sdb lvextend -l +100%FREE /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 resize2fs /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 This worked fine. I subsequently filled up the VM, then deleted most of the used disk space. However, the unused disk space was never recovered after I deleted all of the files. This will illustrate what I'm saying better: # df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00 61G 32G 26G 56% / /dev/sda1 99M 20M 75M 21% /boot tmpfs 1006M 0 1006M 0% /dev/shm # pwd; du -h --max-depth=0 / 5.1G . I cannot figure out how to get the partition to see that only 5.1 GB is used. Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?

  Read the article

• So I want to separate my Program Files from the hard disk with the other system files. What is the b

  - by grg-n-sox

  So I am running Windows 7 as my only OS. I have two hard drives on my computer. The first one is a 74GB Western Digital 10K RPM Raptor. The second one is a 1TB Seagate Barracuda (couldn't remember if it was a 7200.12 or some other decimal after the 7200). The OS in installed to the Raptor and I am just using the Barracuda for storage. With this setup, in case you couldn't guess already, the Raptor fills up quick and I am constantly having to maintain file locations. And although it is nice to have that quicker boot time and program loading, the time spent maintaining the drive makes me waste more time overall. So I am looking for a way to try to keep it clear while still keeping up system loading speeds. A performance hit on games and such is easily acceptable and as long as I can guarantee a 5GB space on the Raptor, I can always just temporarily move the disc image there. So I am figuring that having games installed like Boarderlands and Mass Effect, as well as having large files such as linux distro DVD disc images in My Documents, I probably should be moving my personal files and Program Files directories to the Barracuda. I currently have folders on the Barracuda for this, but this means routinely copying files over and I can't really do anything with the Program Files folder that already exists. The best I can do is remember to designate the install directory of any program installation to the alternative install directory, which I can't seem to get to ever work right with Steam. With that in mind, is there a way that is not too drastic to let me just change some folders and system settings once and everything works fine afterwards for my setup? I have considered just reinstalling Windows 7 to the Barracuda but that would defeat the purpose of the Raptor except for running disc images off of. I am also heard a bit about being able to use symlinks to fix this, but I have also heard that symlinks in Windows are not necessarily the same and not as well supported on Windows. An example a friend mentioned was something about how if you have a symlink in Windows on a small hard drive to a large hard drive and the contents the symlink points to is larger than the small hard drive's capacity, then Windows will think the smaller hard drive is full. So is there a fix/workaround that will let me use symlinks across hard drives without the issues or is there a better solution I am not being told about, not mentioning, or not thinking of?

  Read the article

• Time Machine (OSX) doesn't back up files in Mount Point or Disk Image File

  - by Chris

  Hi all, I found this Q&A (http://superuser.com/questions/148849/backup-mounted-drive-of-an-image-in-time-machine) and this prompted me to ask the following question: I have two disk images which are scripted to be mounted on login. These two disk images are always mounted to the same location. These two disk images are encrypted TrueCrypt volumes. Time Machine (TM) will only back up the disk images the first time they are mounted, but not after that. As I modify documents within the volumes throughout the day, the modified timestamps are adjusted properly. However, TM does not back them up. TM never backs up the mount points which are two folders within my home directory. Any ideas as to why neither the mount point or the image files are backed up? Do the image files have to be closed (unmounted) after being modified for TM to back them up? Thanks, Chris

  Read the article

• Possible to restore Windows Partition disk image?

  - by kd7iwp

  I have a machine that was dual-booting Windows 7 and Ubuntu 12.04. I used the Disks program in Ubuntu to make a disk image of my windows partition which I saved on an external disk. I then reformatted the main drive and installed Ubuntu 12.10. I created a spare partition and restored that Windows disk image to that partition. Is it possible to boot Windows? I have run boot-repair and Grub now gives me both Ubuntu and Windows options but when I select Windows I get only a black screen with blinking cursor. I ran a Windows recovery disk and ran startup repair but still no luck. I also tried running lilo inside Ubuntu but still can't boot Windows. Any other ideas? PS, I'm on a Netbook with no DVD drive so I can't just reinstall Windows though if that is my only option I can borrow a DVD eventually.

  Read the article

• no disk io but iowait very high

  - by Dan

  there is no disk io going results of iotop Total DISK READ: 0.00 B/s | Total DISK WRITE: 0.00 B/s TID PRIO USER DISK READ DISK WRITE SWAPIN IO< COMMAND 1 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % init [3] 1930 be/4 named 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % named -u ~d/run-root 1931 be/4 named 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % named -u ~d/run-root 1932 be/4 named 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % named -u ~d/run-root 1933 be/4 named 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % named -u ~d/run-root 1810 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % sh /usr/b~user=mysql 9795 be/4 apache 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % httpd 8004 be/4 apache 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % httpd 3226 be/4 postfix 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % tlsmgr -l -t unix -u 8154 be/4 apache 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % httpd 9759 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % find -name php.ini 9249 be/4 apache 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % httpd 1756 be/4 postfix 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % psa-pc-re~@localhost 1863 be/4 mysql 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % mysqld --~mysql.sock 3123 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % crond 1758 be/4 postfix 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % psa-pc-re~@localhost 1865 be/4 mysql 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % mysqld --~mysql.sock 1592 be/4 sw-cp-se 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % sw-cp-ser~ver/config 7612 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % sshd: root@pts/0 7614 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % sftp-server 7615 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % -bash 1602 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % sshd 8003 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % httpd but iowait very high ? iostat report avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 0.83 0.00 0.13 13.83 0.00 85.20 Device: tps Blk_read/s Blk_wrtn/s Blk_read Blk_wrtn server runs like a snail what could be wrong here ? thanks

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >