Search Results

Search found 2834 results on 114 pages for 'filesystem corruption'.

Page 43/114 | < Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >

  • Why is (free_space + used_space) != total_size in df? [migrated]

    - by Timothy Jones
    I have a ~2TB ext4 USB external disk which is about half full: $ df Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/sdc 1922860848 927384456 897800668 51% /media/big I'm wondering why the total size (1922860848) isn't the same as Used+Available (1825185124)? From this answer I see that 5% of the disk might be reserved for root, but that would still only take the total used to 1921328166, which is still off. Is it related to some other filesystem overhead? In case it's relevant, lsof -n | grep deleted shows no deleted files on this disk, and there are no other filesystems mounted inside this one.

    Read the article

  • For kvm host images. GFS2 or OCFS2 with drbd8?

    - by yvess
    I want a shared filesystem on top of drbd8 on two nodes. The servers run ubuntu 9.10. I googled a lot, but couldn't find an clear trend what the web community prefers. It's seems that OCFS2 is more used at the moment. Which filesystem is more reliable, faster? GFS2 or OCFS2? Is the linux community going more towards GFS2 or OCFS2? Which of this two is better supported by ubuntu 9.10? Are there better (or more common) alternatives?

    Read the article

  • No space left on device with encrypted disk that takes all space

    - by Yosef
    I use Ubuntu 11.04. There's no space left on device. I have encrypted the disk that takes up space (maybe it's good to disable it, but I don't know how). In shell, I get this message: No space left on device I run df -I: Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/sda1 3055616 602499 2453117 20% / none 210161 890 209271 1% /dev none 214789 8 214781 1% /dev/shm none 214789 53 214736 1% /var/run none 214789 3 214786 1% /var/lock /home/myuser/.Private 3055616 602499 2453117 20% /home/myuser df -I Edit: When I run only df: Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/sda1 48060296 45618928 0 100% / none 1538340 684 1537656 1% /dev none 1547596 808 1546788 1% /dev/shm none 1547596 104 1547492 1% /var/run none 1547596 0 1547596 0% /var/lock /home/myuser/.Private 48060296 45618928 0 100% /home/myuser Edit: I thinking about few solution but I don't know which better and how exactly to do them: to enlarge partition size (I cant install gparted - no more disk space) remove encryption of partition - I really not need that

    Read the article

  • Missing over 100GB of Space on sda1 RHEL

    - by WifiGhost
    I have a server setup with a RAID 5 using (3) 500GB drives, 1 as a spare so unused in the RAID. So in my mind i start out with 990GB with the RAID 5 in place. When looking at DF or the built in disk space utility i only see a total of about 882GB, how can i find where the 100+GB went? How can i get it back? I've checked the RAID 5 BIOS and i see all the space. I've tried looking manually and through terminal commands with no luck. Filesystem - 1K-blocks - Used Available - Use% - Mounted on /dev/mapper/vg_web-lv_root 838084192 48368700 747153060 7% / tmpfs 12104644 592 12104052 1% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 495844 121546 348698 26% /boot /dev/mapper/vg_web-lv_home 82569904 259136 78116468 1% /home Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/vg_web-lv_root 800G 47G 713G 7% / tmpfs 12G 592K 12G 1% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 485M 119M 341M 26% /boot /dev/mapper/vg_web-lv_home 79G 254M 75G 1% /home

    Read the article

  • Out of disk space on 4GB partiton yet it's only using 2GB

    - by Camsoft
    I'm running Ubuntu and have had a problem where the root partition has run out of disk space. When I perform df -h I get the following: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda6 4.6G 4.5G 0 100% / Yet there are only 2GB of files actually using up this partition. I then ran the following df -i and I get the following: Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/sda6 305824 118885 186939 39% / I have no idea what the -i flag does but it clearly shows that only 39% is used. Can anyone explain where my disk space has gone?

    Read the article

  • Why use multiple partitions on a rhel server?

    - by Jakobud
    I'm about to reformat and reinstall CentOS onto an old server. The server runs on a modest 30 node small business network and has a variety of responsibilities including MySQL, a Samba share, DHCPd & SVN/Trac. The old sysadmin had this server setup with almost a dozen different partitions for various things. I'm trying to understand what the advantages of multiple partitions are as opposed to a just one filesystem at /. Speed? Flexibility? Security? It seems like if you misjudge the necessary size for any given partition and it ends up filling up too fast, it requires a sysadmin to go in and expand the partition, etc... Seems like it would be easier if everything was just one flat / filesystem. But I'm sure there are some advantages I'm not aware of. The server is currently running a handful of HDDs raided to ~2TB (raid 0).

    Read the article

  • How to clean up an unprocessed orphan inode list?

    - by bmk
    I tried to mount a formerly readonly mounted filesystem read-writeable: mount -o remount,rw /mountpoint Unfortunately it did not work: mount: /mountpoint not mounted already, or bad option dmesg reports: [2570543.520449] EXT4-fs (dm-0): Couldn't remount RDWR because of unprocessed orphan inode list. Please umount/remount instead A umount does not work, too: umount /mountpoint umount: /mountpoint: device is busy. (In some cases useful info about processes that use the device is found by lsof(8) or fuser(1)) Unfortunately neither lsof of fuser don't show any process accessing something located under the mount point. So - how can I clean up this unprocessed orphan list to be able to mount the filesystem again without rebooting the computer?

    Read the article

  • Retrieving a specific value from “df -h” using shell

    - by diegodias
    When I use df -h, I get the following output: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00 59G 2.2G 54G 4% / /dev/sda1 122M 38M 78M 33% /boot tmpfs 1.1G 0 1.1G 0% /dev/shm 10.10.0.105:/somepath 11T 8.4T 2.1T 81% /storage4 10.11.0.101:/somepath 15T 8.9T 5.9T 61% /storage1 /dev/mapper/patha 5.0T 255G 4.8T 5% /storage5_vol0 /dev/mapper/pathb 5.0T 195G 4.9T 4% /storage5_vol1 /dev/mapper/pathc 5.0T 608G 4.5T 12% /storage5_vol2 I want to write a script that gets the value of Avail column on a specific storage. I used to use df -k /storage_name | tail -1 | awk '{print $3}' But the FileSystem column can have a value or not .. which would change the variable of my script from $3 to $4. How can I get the Avail on a single command line even if there are no values on the previous columns?

    Read the article

  • RHEL5: Can't create sparse file bigger than 256GB in tmpfs

    - by John Kugelman
    /var/log/lastlog gets written to when you log in. The size of this file is based off of the largest UID in the system. The larger the maximum UID, the larger this file is. Thankfully it's a sparse file so the size on disk is much smaller than the size ls reports (ls -s reports the size on disk). On our system we're authenticating against an Active Directory server, and the UIDs users are assigned end up being really, really large. Like, say, UID 900,000,000 for the first AD user, 900,000,001 for the second, etc. That's strange but should be okay. It results in /var/log/lastlog being huuuuuge, though--once an AD user logs in lastlog shows up as 280GB. Its real size is still small, thankfully. This works fine when /var/log/lastlog is stored on the hard drive on an ext3 filesystem. It breaks, however, if lastlog is stored in a tmpfs filesystem. Then it appears that the max file size for any file on the tmpfs is 256GB, so the sessreg program errors out trying to write to lastlog. Where is this 256GB limit coming from, and how can I increase it? As a simple test for creating large sparse files I've been doing: dd if=/dev/zero of=sparse-file bs=1 count=1 seek=300GB I've tried Googling for "tmpfs max file size", "256GB filesystem limit", "linux max file size", things like that. I haven't been able to find much. The only mention of 256GB I can find is that ext3 filesystems with 2KB blocks are limited to 256GB files. But our hard drives are formatted with 4K blocks so that doesn't seem to be it--not to mention this is happening in a tmpfs mounted ON TOP of the hard drive so the ext3 partition shouldn't be a factor. This is all happening on a 64-bit Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4 system. Interestingly, on my personal development machine, which is a 32-bit Fedora Core 6 box, I can create 300GB+ files in tmpfs filesystems no problem. On the RHEL5.4 systems it is no go.

    Read the article

  • Linux - Help, I'm running out of inodes!

    - by Rory McCann
    I have a filesystem that has lots of small files. Currently about 80% of inodes are used (I checked with df -i), however only 60% of disk space is used. How can I 'increase' the number of inodes? If it was just disk space, I know that I could just increase the size of the disk (this disk is on LVM). If I increase the size of the disk, will that make me have more inodes? I'm willing to grow the filesystem this disk is on, if that'd help.

    Read the article

  • Defeating the RAID5 write hole with ZFS (but not RAID-Z) [closed]

    - by Michael Shick
    I'm setting up a long-term storage system for keeping personal backups and archives. I plan to have RAID5 starting with a relatively small array and adding devices over time to expand storage. I may also want to convert to RAID6 down the road when the array gets large. Linux md is a perfect fit for this use case since it allows both of the changes I want on a live array and performance isn't at all important. Low cost is also great. Now, I also want to defend against file corruption, so it looked like a RAID-Z1 would be a good fit, but evidently I would only be able to add additional RAID5 (RAID-Z1) sets at a time rather than individual drives. I want to be able to add drives one at a time, and I don't want to have to give up another device for parity with every expansion. So at this point, it looks like I'll be using a plain ZFS filesystem on top of an md RAID5 array. That brings me to my primary question: Will ZFS be able to correct or at least detect corruption resulting from the RAID5 write hole? Additionally, any other caveats or advice for such a set up is welcome. I'll probably be using Debian, but I'll definitely be using Linux since I'm familiar with it, so that means only as new a version of ZFS as is available for Linux (via ZFS-FUSE or so).

    Read the article

  • Skipping hardlinks when using TSM Backup

    - by Lars Haugseth
    We need to backup a filesystem with lots of hardlinks. Since there are several hardlinks for each "true" file, we would like to skip all the hardlinks when backing up the filesystem to avoid n exact copies of each file. The backup is done using Tivoli Storage Manager Backup, and we've been unable to get it to treat hardlinks as anything other than separate files to be backed up alongside each other. In case it's relevant for possible solutions, I'd like to note that it's possible to tell a hardlink from a proper file by the filename: foobarbaz-123.ext # file foobarbaz-123-1.ext # hardlink foobarbaz-123-2.ext # hardlink barbazfoo-456.ext # file barbazfoo-456-1.ext # hardlink barbazfoo-456-2.ext # hardlink barbazfoo-456-3.ext # hardlink That is, all hardlinks have two hyphens in the filename, where as proper files have just the one. The server is running Ubuntu Linux, and the files are situated on a gfs volume on our SAN.

    Read the article

  • Format as NTFS without Journal

    - by palswim
    I have a flash drive that I'd like to format for use in Windows. I would like support for symbolic links, so I can't use FAT/FAT32/exFAT. I would prefer to use the ext4 filesystem and disable journaling, with the Ext2Fsd filesystem driver, but have (so far) found that I can't make soft links across filesystems that Windows will read, Ext2Fsd has an annoying bug about always mounting partitions as read-only and has problems resuming from sleep, and some programs have problems writing to the partition even after manually configuring Ext2Fsd to allow writes. So, I would like to use NTFS for the flash drive, but disable the journaling feature (causes extra writes), if possible. How can I do this?

    Read the article

  • Recover data from an ''unpartitioned'' hard drive

    - by Rafael S. Calsaverini
    I'm trying to recover data from a hdd for a friend from work. He was using it on an old win98 PC (so I guess it was a FAT 16 filesystem). When he installed the drive on a new PC his Windows XP can't recognize the filesystem and give an error message saying that the drive is unformatted. I tried to mount the hdd under linux but no partitions appear to be associated with the drive (I have only /dev/sdb associated with that drive and no /dev/sdb1 or sdb2 etc). I've found many articles on the web on how to recover partitions (with scripts like dd and ddrescue) but how do I make it when I have no partitions and the system say my drive is unpartioned? Is it possible to create a new partition without loosing the data?

    Read the article

  • How to mirror filesystems with millions of hardlinks?

    - by Thomas Berger
    We have one big problem at the moment: We need to mirror a filesystem for one of our customers. Thats usual not really a problem, but here it is: On this filesystem there is one folder with millions of hardlinks (yes! MILLIONS!). rsync requires more then 4 days to just build the filelist. We use the following rsync options: rsync -Havz --progress serverA:/data/cms /data/ Has anyone a idea how to speed up this rsync, or use alternatives? We could not use dd as the target disk is smaller then the source.

    Read the article

  • Unable to access intel fake RAID 1 array in Fedora 14 after reboot

    - by Sim
    Hello everyone, 1st I am relatively new to linux (but not to *nix). I have 4 disks assembled in the following intel ahci bios fake raid arrays: 2x320GB RAID1 - used for operating systems md126 2x1TB RAID1 - used for data md125 I have used the raid of size 320GB to install my operating system and the second raid I didn't even select during the installation of Fedora 14. After successful partitioning and installation of Fedora, I tried to make the second array available, it was possible to make it visible in linux with mdadm --assembe --scan , after that I created one maximum size partition and 1 maximum size ext4 filesystem in it. Mounted, and used it. After restart - a few I/O errors during boot regarding md125 + inability to mount the filesystem on it and dropped into repair shell. I commented the filesystem in fstab and it booted. To my surprise, the array was marked as "auto read only": [root@localhost ~]# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md125 : active (auto-read-only) raid1 sdc[1] sdd[0] 976759808 blocks super external:/md127/0 [2/2] [UU] md127 : inactive sdc[1](S) sdd[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm md126 : active raid1 sda[1] sdb[0] 312566784 blocks super external:/md1/0 [2/2] [UU] md1 : inactive sdb[1](S) sda[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm unused devices: <none> [root@localhost ~]# and the partition in it was not available as device special file in /dev: [root@localhost ~]# ls -l /dev/md125* brw-rw---- 1 root disk 9, 125 Jan 6 15:50 /dev/md125 [root@localhost ~]# But the partition is there according to fdisk: [root@localhost ~]# fdisk -l /dev/md125 Disk /dev/md125: 1000.2 GB, 1000202043392 bytes 19 heads, 10 sectors/track, 10281682 cylinders, total 1953519616 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x1b238ea9 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/md125p1 2048 1953519615 976758784 83 Linux [root@localhost ~]# I tried to "activate" the array in different ways (I'm not experienced with mdadm and the man page is gigantic so I was only browsing it looking for my answer) but it was impossible - the array would still stay in "auto read only" and the device special file for the partition it will not be in /dev. It was only after I recreated the partition via fdisk that it reappeared in /dev... until next reboot. So, my question is - How do I make the array automatically available after reboot? Here is some additional information: 1st I am able to see the UUID of the array in blkid: [root@localhost ~]# blkid /dev/sdc: UUID="b9a1149f-ae11-4fc8-a600-0d77354dc42a" SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3" /dev/sdd: UUID="b9a1149f-ae11-4fc8-a600-0d77354dc42a" SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3" /dev/md126p1: UUID="60C8D9A7C8D97C2A" TYPE="ntfs" /dev/md126p2: UUID="3d1b38a3-b469-4b7c-b016-8abfb26a5d7d" TYPE="ext4" /dev/md126p3: UUID="1Msqqr-AAF8-k0wi-VYnq-uWJU-y0OD-uIFBHL" TYPE="LVM2_member" /dev/mapper/vg00-rootlv: LABEL="_Fedora-14-x86_6" UUID="34cc1cf5-6845-4489-8303-7a90c7663f0a" TYPE="ext4" /dev/mapper/vg00-swaplv: UUID="4644d857-e13b-456c-ac03-6f26299c1046" TYPE="swap" /dev/mapper/vg00-homelv: UUID="82bd58b2-edab-4b4b-aec4-b79595ecd0e3" TYPE="ext4" /dev/mapper/vg00-varlv: UUID="1b001444-5fdd-41b6-a59a-9712ec6def33" TYPE="ext4" /dev/mapper/vg00-tmplv: UUID="bf7d2459-2b35-4a1c-9b81-d4c4f24a9842" TYPE="ext4" /dev/md125: UUID="b9a1149f-ae11-4fc8-a600-0d77354dc42a" SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3" /dev/sda: TYPE="isw_raid_member" /dev/md125p1: UUID="420adfdd-6c4e-4552-93f0-2608938a4059" TYPE="ext4" [root@localhost ~]# Here is how /etc/mdadm.conf looks like: [root@localhost ~]# cat /etc/mdadm.conf # mdadm.conf written out by anaconda MAILADDR root AUTO +imsm +1.x -all ARRAY /dev/md1 UUID=89f60dee:e46a251f:7475814b:d4cc19a9 ARRAY /dev/md126 UUID=a8775c90:cee66376:5310fc13:63bcba5b ARRAY /dev/md125 UUID=b9a1149f:ae114fc8:a6000d77:354dc42a [root@localhost ~]# here is how /proc/mdstat looks like after I recreate the partition in the array so that it becomes available: [root@localhost ~]# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md125 : active raid1 sdc[1] sdd[0] 976759808 blocks super external:/md127/0 [2/2] [UU] md127 : inactive sdc[1](S) sdd[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm md126 : active raid1 sda[1] sdb[0] 312566784 blocks super external:/md1/0 [2/2] [UU] md1 : inactive sdb[1](S) sda[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm unused devices: <none> [root@localhost ~]# Detailed output regarding the array in subject: [root@localhost ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md125 /dev/md125: Container : /dev/md127, member 0 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 976759808 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 976759940 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Update Time : Fri Jan 7 00:38:00 2011 State : clean Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 30ebc3c2:b6a64751:4758d05c:fa8ff782 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 1 8 32 0 active sync /dev/sdc 0 8 48 1 active sync /dev/sdd [root@localhost ~]# and /etc/fstab, with /data commented (the filesystem that is on this array): # # /etc/fstab # Created by anaconda on Thu Jan 6 03:32:40 2011 # # Accessible filesystems, by reference, are maintained under '/dev/disk' # See man pages fstab(5), findfs(8), mount(8) and/or blkid(8) for more info # /dev/mapper/vg00-rootlv / ext4 defaults 1 1 UUID=3d1b38a3-b469-4b7c-b016-8abfb26a5d7d /boot ext4 defaults 1 2 #UUID=420adfdd-6c4e-4552-93f0-2608938a4059 /data ext4 defaults 0 1 /dev/mapper/vg00-homelv /home ext4 defaults 1 2 /dev/mapper/vg00-tmplv /tmp ext4 defaults 1 2 /dev/mapper/vg00-varlv /var ext4 defaults 1 2 /dev/mapper/vg00-swaplv swap swap defaults 0 0 tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 sysfs /sys sysfs defaults 0 0 proc /proc proc defaults 0 0 [root@localhost ~]# Thanks in advance to everyone that even read this whole issue :-)

    Read the article

  • iPhone Lag Terrible - SLOW - What's going on with the iPhone OS?

    - by Sam Schutte
    I've had my iPhone 3G for about a year now, and it seems like at least once a month, it gets bogged down and gets slower and slower - horrible lag when typing, going back to the home screen or opening an app can take 20 seconds. Has anyone else run into this and found "the" solution. What you always read on other boards is to reboot the handset (hold down home and the power button), but that doesn't improve anything for me. I've reinstalled the OS like 5 times now, and I'm getting pretty sick of doing it so often. And I don't buy that it's a hardware issue really, since it works fine for weeks after a fresh install. Anyone have a solution or an idea of what specific actions cause this kind of evident data corruption (OS corruption?) and slowness? Note - I'm looking for specific things here. That is, has anyone done the research to see exactly what on the phone operating system is getting messed up that causes this lag (which is discussed all over the internet, with no working solutions). I don't own a mac, so I can't delve into the guts of the iPhone very well to see what's up with it... Some additional info: Reboots (hold down power/home) and "Sleeps" (slide off) do nothing. Only fresh re-installs help I only have about 15 apps installed - sometimes you see the answer to uninstall apps if you have too many, I'd hope that 15 isn't too many, and even when I've had none installed, it still gets hung up after a period of time. This phone is not jailbroken, and it is running the 3.0.1 release.

    Read the article

  • Repartition Ubuntu by command line?

    - by DisgruntledGoat
    On my server the filesystem includes these partitions: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda6 4.6G 929M 3.5G 21% / /dev/sda5 76M 20M 53M 27% /boot /dev/sda8 449G 199M 426G 1% /home /dev/sda7 4.6G 4.4G 0 100% /var (Output from df -ah) I'm storing the web sites and databases under /var and as you can see it's got full. The /home folder just has basic user directories and nothing else so I'd like to repartition the server so that /dev/sda8 is about 5GB, with the rest going to dev/sda7. What's the easiest way to do this via command line (i.e. SSH)?

    Read the article

  • Solaris to Linux conversion: Use VxFS or GFS?

    - by w00t
    We're a Solaris shop looking at RedHat Enterprise Linux and one of the things we're wondering is if we should keep Veritas Volume Manager + FileSystem or go with LVM+ext3 or RedHat's preferred cluster filesystem solution, GFS. One of the things we like about Veritas is that it can use Veritas Volume Replicator to have a remote copy of important filesystems. This functionality seems to be missing from RedHat, DRBD doesn't seem to be packaged in RHEL... So my questions are: Does anybody use VxFS/VxVM/VVR on Linux? Thoughts, experiences? Comparison with LVM+ext3? Anybody using GFS? Thoughts, experiences? Do you do remote replication for disaster recovery, and if so, how? Is there a standard RedHat way?

    Read the article

  • Linux LVM snapshot commit or revert?

    - by Shewfig
    Hi, I'm about to perform an experimental upgrade on my CentOS 5 server. If the upgrade fails, I want to be able to back out the changes to the filesystem. This scenario seems similar to the example in Section 3.8 of the LVM HOWTO for LVM2 read-write snapshots - but the example is rather lacking in actual how-to. 1) How would I commit the changes, merging them back into the original partition? 2) How would I revert the changes, restoring the filesystem back to its original state? Should I assume that I'll need to restart several services, if not outright reboot? 3) Is it possible to snapshot only certain directories on a partition, or is it a partition-wide operation? Thanks...

    Read the article

  • Suppress EXT3-fs warning on mount

    - by STM
    I am familiar with output suppress on Unix machines, ie: cat /file/that/doesnt/exist > /dev/null 2>& However I can't seem to suppress the output of mount when an ext3 filesystem is mounted for the nth time, and it recommends an fsck. As it happens, fscks are run regularly by another machine, so these warning messages are needlessly interrupting the flow of output to my pretty bash script. These are the errors: # mount -t ext3 /dev/sda1 /mnt > /dev/null 2>& kjournald starting. Commit interval 5 seconds EXT3-fs warning: maximal mount count reached, running e2fsck is recommended EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on sd(8,1), internal journal EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Can anyone shed some light on this? I'm clearly blocking both fd's, but somehow output is still getting through. This is GNU Bash v2.05a

    Read the article

  • Recover data from a corrupted virtualbox vmdk file?

    - by Neth
    The power went out while I was doing a build on a VirtualBox machine, when I restarted the vmdk for the disk the vm was using was corrupted, apparently irrecoverably. I have been able to grep the 66GB vmdk file and it finds strings from the code I was working on that hadn't gotten in to subversion yet (yeah, yeah I know). But the strings are either in the shell history or what look to be strings inside object files. Any ideas for finding/recovering the source code? If it helps the vm was Linux, Fedora Core 10 on an ext3 filesystem. The host is an ubuntu 10.04_amd64 and has an ext4 filesystem.

    Read the article

  • Unmounted root partition

    - by Jack
    My server running Debian lenny has just had a power cut recently and its come back up with the root partition in read only mode. I tried to remount the filesystem in read write mode with mount -n -o remount,rw / which then gave the output mount: block device /dev/hda1 is write-protected, mounting read-only. But now the root filesystem isn't mounted at all so I can't run anything to mount the partition again or any other command for that matter such as shutdown because /bin/ isn't there. Is there anything I can do remotely?

    Read the article

  • After Upgrading Ubuntu to 9.10 my hard drive now has a warning.

    - by Sean
    it is a 500gb hard drive format as ext3 path /dev/sdc1 The disk utility does not even see this. This Warning is from gparted: e2label: No such device or address while trying to open /dev/sdc1 Couldn't find valid filesystem superblock. Couldn't find valid filesystem superblock. dump2fs 1.41.9 (22-Aug-2009) dumpe2fs: No such device or address while trying to open /dev/sdc1 Unable to read contents of this file system? Because of this some operations may be unavailable. END OF ERROR MESSAGE Did I lose something during the upgrade of the system? Was it the hard drive or the Ubuntu system that went bad?

    Read the article

  • Disk is apparently in use by the system

    - by Shaun
    I've just fitted two disks to my home server. I'm trying to format and then raid them but I'm getting a problem that hours of Googling hasn't resolved this. The error that I'm getting is: # mkfs.ext3 /dev/sdb1 mke2fs 1.39 (29-May-2006) /dev/sdb1 is apparently in use by the system; will not make a filesystem here! # df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda1 4.0G 1.9G 2.0G 49% / none 380M 0 380M 0% /dev/shm /opt/xensource/packages/iso/XenCenter.iso 51M 51M 0 100% /var/xen/xc-install # mount -t ext3 /dev/sdb1 /mnt/b mount: /dev/sdb1 already mounted or /mnt/b busy I'm new to this and it's got me beat. I wouldn't ask if I hadn't done my research first. Thanks.

    Read the article

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