Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #203766 > unrolled thread

Gparted error report

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Gparted error report Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2019-01-01 13:10 +0100
    Re: Gparted error report <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-01 15:10 +0100
      Re: Gparted error report Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2019-01-01 18:30 +0100
        Re: Gparted error report <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-01 18:40 +0100
          Re: Gparted error report Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2019-01-01 19:50 +0100
        Re: Gparted error report Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-01-01 19:50 +0100
          Sources list, was Re: Gparted error report David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-02 03:00 +0100
            Re: Sources list, was Re: Gparted error report Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2019-01-02 13:00 +0100
              Re: Sources list, was Re: Gparted error report Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 18:00 +0100
    Re: Gparted error report Jimmy Johnson <field.engineer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 17:10 +0100
    Re: Gparted error report Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2019-01-02 17:40 +0100

#203766 — Gparted error report

I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in the 
shop for cooling problems.

I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and 
received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck could 
not analyze the first partition.

I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to be 
running Debian 9.1.

*FIRST QUESTION*
How do I determine just what Debian release is running?

When I attempted the repartition on the second machine the error report was:
> GParted 0.25.0 --enable-libparted-dmraid --enable-online-resize
> 
> Libparted 3.2
> Shrink /dev/sdc1 from 124.96 GiB to 80.00 GiB  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
>      	
> calibrate /dev/sdc1  00:00:00    ( SUCCESS )
>      	
> path: /dev/sdc1 (partition)
> start: 2048
> end: 262051839
> size: 262049792 (124.96 GiB)
> check file system on /dev/sdc1 for errors and (if possible) fix them  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
>      	
> e2fsck -f -y -v -C 0 /dev/sdc1  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
>      	
> Possibly non-existent device?
> e2fsck 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
> e2fsck: No such file or directory while trying to open /dev/sdc1

It is obviously *NOT* a "non-existent device" as it is readable on 
another machine.

*SECOND QUESTION*
What is this telling me?

TIA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#203772

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
> the shop for cooling problems.
> 
> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and
> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck
> could not analyze the first partition.
> 
> I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to
> be running Debian 9.1.
> 
> *FIRST QUESTION*
> How do I determine just what Debian release is running?

To a first approximation:

  tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version 
  9.6

Since it's possible to install packages from other releases (cf.
FrankenDebian) or from alien repositories, this is just a first
approximation.

> When I attempted the repartition on the second machine the error report was:
> >GParted 0.25.0 --enable-libparted-dmraid --enable-online-resize
> >
> >Libparted 3.2
> >Shrink /dev/sdc1 from 124.96 GiB to 80.00 GiB  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
> >     	
> >calibrate /dev/sdc1  00:00:00    ( SUCCESS )
> >     	
> >path: /dev/sdc1 (partition)
> >start: 2048
> >end: 262051839
> >size: 262049792 (124.96 GiB)
> >check file system on /dev/sdc1 for errors and (if possible) fix them  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
> >     	
> >e2fsck -f -y -v -C 0 /dev/sdc1  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
> >     	
> >Possibly non-existent device?
> >e2fsck 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
> >e2fsck: No such file or directory while trying to open /dev/sdc1
> 
> It is obviously *NOT* a "non-existent device" as it is readable on
> another machine.

Note that this device doesn't have to be called /dev/sdc* on your
current machine. The kernel just picks whatever /dev/sda, /dev/sdb...
is free and allocates it. Those names are not permanent.

Stick your device into the USB port, and shortly thereafter do an

  tomas@trotzki:~$ sudo dmesg | tail
  [sudo] password for tomas: 
  [  417.445120] scsi host6: usb-storage 3-2:1.0
  [  417.445316] usbcore: registered new interface driver usb-storage
  [  417.447343] usbcore: registered new interface driver uas
  [  418.470251] scsi 6:0:0:0: Direct-Access     SanDisk  Cruzer Blade     1.20 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
  [  418.471271] sd 6:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 0
  [  418.472287] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] 31266816 512-byte logical blocks: (16.0 GB/14.9 GiB)
  [  418.473021] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
  [  418.473028] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 43 00 00 00
  [  418.473295] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
  [  418.482812] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI removable disk

(I just did that). You see, in my case, the device is called "/dev/sdb".

Just assuming the device name is somewhat dangerous: you might end up
repartitioning (or worse) the wrong one.

> *SECOND QUESTION*
> What is this telling me?

That (most probably) the device didn't end up as /dev/sdc, but possibly as
/dev/sdb (because that name was free). Most probably your other machine
has two block devices, thus /dev/sda and /dev/sdb are already taken.

This is, btw, the reason why nowadays the preferred way is to address
the partitions by UUID.

HTH
-- tomás

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203773

On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
>> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
>> the shop for cooling problems.
>>
>> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and
>> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck
>> could not analyze the first partition.
>>
>> I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to
>> be running Debian 9.1.
>>
>> *FIRST QUESTION*
>> How do I determine just what Debian release is running?
> 
> To a first approximation:
> 
>    tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
>    9.6
> 
> Since it's possible to install packages from other releases (cf.
> FrankenDebian) or from alien repositories, this is just a first
> approximation.

My system reports 9.1 {as I thought it was}
It was initially installed from a purchased DVD 1.
My sources list now has a line
"deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib".
The only packages I've added have been from that repository.

> 
>> When I attempted the repartition on the second machine the error report was:
>>> GParted 0.25.0 --enable-libparted-dmraid --enable-online-resize
>>>
>>> Libparted 3.2
>>> Shrink /dev/sdc1 from 124.96 GiB to 80.00 GiB  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
>>>      	
>>> calibrate /dev/sdc1  00:00:00    ( SUCCESS )
>>>      	
>>> path: /dev/sdc1 (partition)
>>> start: 2048
>>> end: 262051839
>>> size: 262049792 (124.96 GiB)
>>> check file system on /dev/sdc1 for errors and (if possible) fix them 00:00:00    ( ERROR )
>>>      	
>>> e2fsck -f -y -v -C 0 /dev/sdc1  00:00:00    ( ERROR )
>>>      	
>>> Possibly non-existent device?
>>> e2fsck 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
>>> e2fsck: No such file or directory while trying to open /dev/sdc1
>>
>> It is obviously *NOT* a "non-existent device" as it is readable on
>> another machine.

Actually it is also readable on this machine.

> 
> Note that this device doesn't have to be called /dev/sdc* on your
> current machine. The kernel just picks whatever /dev/sda, /dev/sdb...
> is free and allocates it. Those names are not permanent.
> [snip]
> 
>> *SECOND QUESTION*
>> What is this telling me?
> 
> That (most probably) the device didn't end up as /dev/sdc, but possiblyas
> /dev/sdb (because that name was free). Most probably your other machine
> has two block devices, thus /dev/sda and /dev/sdb are already taken.

I just reran. Everything worked. Murphy did not take a holiday ;<

> 
> This is, btw, the reason why nowadays the preferred way is to address
> the partitions by UUID.

I working inside Gparted's GUI and just saved its error report.

Thanks/

> 
> HTH
> -- tomás
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203775

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 11:20:19AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

[...]

> >To a first approximation:
> >
> >   tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
> >   9.6

[...]

> My system reports 9.1 {as I thought it was}
> It was initially installed from a purchased DVD 1.
> My sources list now has a line
> "deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib".
> The only packages I've added have been from that repository.

Seems the first approximation is Good Enough, then.

[...]

> >>>Possibly non-existent device?
> >>>e2fsck 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
> >>>e2fsck: No such file or directory while trying to open /dev/sdc1
> >>
> >>It is obviously *NOT* a "non-existent device" as it is readable on
> >>another machine.
> 
> Actually it is also readable on this machine.

[...]

> I just reran. Everything worked. Murphy did not take a holiday ;<

OK. So perhaps your USB bus fainted for a short while. Still I
hope you understood that going by the /dev/sdX names involves
"some" risk.

Cheers
-- tomás

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203777

On 01/01/2019 11:30 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 11:20:19AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>

> OK. So perhaps your USB bus fainted for a short while. Still I
> hope you understood that going by the /dev/sdX names involves
> "some" risk.

I'm innocent. The /dev/sdX reference was Gparted's reference, NOT mine ;/
Besides I I use "by LABEL" any time I can.
That way I have a chance of seeing whats up Doc ;}

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203776

On 1/1/19, Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
> On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
>>> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
>>> the shop for cooling problems.
>>>
>>> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and
>>> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck
>>> could not analyze the first partition.
>>>
>>> I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to
>>> be running Debian 9.1.
>>>
>>> *FIRST QUESTION*
>>> How do I determine just what Debian release is running?
>>
>> To a first approximation:
>>
>>    tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
>>    9.6
>>
>> Since it's possible to install packages from other releases (cf.
>> FrankenDebian) or from alien repositories, this is just a first
>> approximation.
>
> My system reports 9.1 {as I thought it was}
> It was initially installed from a purchased DVD 1.

If you've been keeping the system updated, shouldn't it say 9.6?

> My sources list now has a line
> "deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib".
> The only packages I've added have been from that repository.

Is there a debian doc that has the recommended source list?

I've found
  https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02#_debian_archive_basics
that has this list:
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib non-free

deb http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib
deb-src http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib


and  https://wiki.debian.org/SourcesList that has this list:

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch main
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch main

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/ stretch/updates main
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/ stretch/updates main

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch-updates main
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch-updates main


They don't match, so I'm wondering if there's a place that shows the
recommended, if you don't know any better use this, sources list.

Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203784 — Sources list, was Re: Gparted error report

On Tue 01 Jan 2019 at 13:45:48 (-0500), Lee wrote:
> On 1/1/19, Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
> > On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
> >>> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
> >>> the shop for cooling problems.
> >>>
> >>> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and
> >>> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck
> >>> could not analyze the first partition.
> >>>
> >>> I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to
> >>> be running Debian 9.1.
> >>>
> >>> *FIRST QUESTION*
> >>> How do I determine just what Debian release is running?
> >>
> >> To a first approximation:
> >>
> >>    tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
> >>    9.6
> >>
> >> Since it's possible to install packages from other releases (cf.
> >> FrankenDebian) or from alien repositories, this is just a first
> >> approximation.
> >
> > My system reports 9.1 {as I thought it was}
> > It was initially installed from a purchased DVD 1.
> 
> If you've been keeping the system updated, shouldn't it say 9.6?

Yes, but you have to know about the OP's habits.

> > My sources list now has a line
> > "deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib".
> > The only packages I've added have been from that repository.
> 
> Is there a debian doc that has the recommended source list?
> 
> I've found
>   https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02#_debian_archive_basics
> that has this list:
> deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib non-free
> 
> deb http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib
> deb-src http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib
> 
> 
> and  https://wiki.debian.org/SourcesList that has this list:
> 
> deb http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch main
> deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch main
> 
> deb http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/ stretch/updates main
> deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/ stretch/updates main
> 
> deb http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch-updates main
> deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian stretch-updates main
> 
> 
> They don't match, so I'm wondering if there's a place that shows the
> recommended, if you don't know any better use this, sources list.

You've quoted six lines from the wiki; there follows this line:

    If you also want the contrib and non-free components,
    add contrib non-free after main:

and then another six line example. The recommendations are made in the
Debian installer, in the screens headed "Configure the package manager".
There's no way of knowing whether the sysadmin requires sources, or
whether they have "political"¹ views on which components to include,
but the security updates are certainly "strongly recommended"². The
sources.list is then written for you.

¹ scare quotes
² literal quotation

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203798 — Re: Sources list, was Re: Gparted error report

On 01/01/2019 07:59 PM, David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 01 Jan 2019 at 13:45:48 (-0500), Lee wrote:
>> On 1/1/19, Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>>> On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>>>> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
>>>>> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
>>>>> the shop for cooling problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and
>>>>> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck
>>>>> could not analyze the first partition.
>>>>>
>>>>> I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to
>>>>> be running Debian 9.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> *FIRST QUESTION*
>>>>> How do I determine just what Debian release is running?
>>>>
>>>> To a first approximation:
>>>>
>>>>     tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
>>>>     9.6
>>>>
>>>> Since it's possible to install packages from other releases (cf.
>>>> FrankenDebian) or from alien repositories, this is just a first
>>>> approximation.
>>>
>>> My system reports 9.1 {as I thought it was}
>>> It was initially installed from a purchased DVD 1.
>>
>> If you've been keeping the system updated, shouldn't it say 9.6?
> 
> Yes, but you have to know about the OP's habits.
> 

Yepp. But I assert my habits are the result of conscious decisions.
I have atypical goals & constraints which intrinsically result in an 
atypical system.

My "update routine" has been to purchase a new DVD set as required 
{normally two per major release}. YMMV ;/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203819 — Re: Sources list, was Re: Gparted error report

On 1/2/19, Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
> On 01/01/2019 07:59 PM, David Wright wrote:
>> On Tue 01 Jan 2019 at 13:45:48 (-0500), Lee wrote:
>>> On 1/1/19, Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>>>> On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>>>>> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
>>>>>> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
>>>>>> the shop for cooling problems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and
>>>>>> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck
>>>>>> could not analyze the first partition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to
>>>>>> be running Debian 9.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *FIRST QUESTION*
>>>>>> How do I determine just what Debian release is running?
>>>>>
>>>>> To a first approximation:
>>>>>
>>>>>     tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
>>>>>     9.6
>>>>>
>>>>> Since it's possible to install packages from other releases (cf.
>>>>> FrankenDebian) or from alien repositories, this is just a first
>>>>> approximation.
>>>>
>>>> My system reports 9.1 {as I thought it was}
>>>> It was initially installed from a purchased DVD 1.
>>>
>>> If you've been keeping the system updated, shouldn't it say 9.6?
>>
>> Yes, but you have to know about the OP's habits.
>>
>
> Yepp. But I assert my habits are the result of conscious decisions.
> I have atypical goals & constraints which intrinsically result in an
> atypical system.
>
> My "update routine" has been to purchase a new DVD set as required
> {normally two per major release}. YMMV ;/

Weren't you the one asking about how to make a local repo for updates
so you didn't have to download any given update more than once?  But
if you're deliberately not updating.. well, it certainly answers the
question of how to tell if you're missing updates or not.

Regards,
Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203814

On 01/01/2019 04:07 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in the 
> shop for cooling problems.
> 
> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and 
> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck could 
> not analyze the first partition.
> 
> I then tried to perform the repartitioning on a machine I believe to be 
> running Debian 9.1.


I think the version in Jessie is doing check sums and the version in 
Stretch is not. If you are going to re-partition, then first delete your 
current partition. If that is not what you want to do, then disable 
checksums and reformat.
To disable checksums on an existing filesystem, ensure that the 
filesystem will pass fsck. Then turn off metadata_csum via
  #tune2fs, e.g. tune2fs -O ^metadata_csum /dev/path/to/disk. One other 
thing is you will need to reformat the partition, but you still may have 
a problem, the partition maybe one byte off and will not boot your 
system, so while using gparted add or remove one byte to the partition 
and then format.  You didn't say, but you can check and repair ext4 with 
#fsck.ext4 -pvcf /dev/sdXX but as above you need to first disable checksum.
-- 
Jimmy Johnson

Slackware64 14.2 - KDE 4.14.32 - AMD A8-7600 - EXT4 at sda9
Registered Linux User #380263

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#203816

Richard Owlett composed on 2019-01-01 06:07 (UTC-0600):

> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in the 
> shop for cooling problems.

> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and 
> received an error message that the installed revision of e2fsck could 
> not analyze the first partition.

Is the 9.1 SSD formatted EXT4 with 64bit enabled? 8.6 might not support that.
Check with tune2fs -l. (not a one, but an L)
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web